Settlement through mediation can lead to the compounding of the offence and acquittal of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.

CRL.REV.P. 275/2017 & Crl.M.(Bail) 670/2017 (for suspension of sentence), Crl.M.A.11812/2019 (for waiver of cost) & CRL.REV.P. 276/2017 & Crl.M.(Bail) 672/2017 (for suspension of sentence), Crl.M.A.11811/2019 (for waiver of cost)

1. Petitioner impugns judgments dated 21.03.2017, whereby, the appeals of the petitioner, impugning orders on conviction dated 04.11.2015 and orders on sentence dated 20.11.2015, have been dismissed.

2. Petitioner has been convicted of an offence under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.5 lakhs as compensation in each of the cases and in default to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment.

3. Subject cheques in both the cases are of Rs.2,50,000/- each.

4. While granting interim suspension of sentence, petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.2 lakhs each and accordingly, a sum of Rs.4 lakhs has been deposited by the petitioner with the Registrar General of this Court.

5. Parties were referred to mediation. Parties have settled their disputes through the process of Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre and Settlement Agreement dated 03.05.2019 has been executed. As per the settlement, petitioner has agreed to pay a total sum of Rs.5,75,000/- besides interest that would have accrued on the amount deposited by the petitioner in this Court.

6. In terms of the settlement, a cheque dated 25.05.2019 for an amount of Rs.1 lakh was paid to the respondent. Said cheque has been duly encashed. Further, a post-dated cheque dated 30.06.2019 for Rs.75,000/- was handed over to the respondent.

7. Petitioner undertakes that the said cheque shall be honoured on its presentation. The undertaking is accepted.

8. Applications have been filed by the petitioner seeking waiver/reduction of the costs on the ground that he has suffered substantial loss in business and has also suffered incarceration of over 40 days.

9. Respondent No.2 is present in Court in person. He submits that he has settled with the petitioner and has no objection to the compounding of the subject offence provided his payment is received. He further confirms that the cheque in the sum of Rs.1 lakh dated 25.05.2019 has been encashed.

10. Respondent No.2 submits that out of the maturity amount of Rs.4 lakhs, which was deposited with the Registrar General, he is willing to help the petitioner by contributing Rs.20,000/- from the interest accrued on the said fixed deposit for being paid to legal aid as costs.

11. Petitioner, who is present in Court in person, undertakes that he shall deposit Rs.40,000/- with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority on or before 31.08.2019. The undertaking is accepted.

12. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances and the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for reduction of the costs.

13. Accordingly, the costs liable to be paid in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H, (2010) 5 SCC 663 is reduced to Rs.60,000/- cumulatively in both the cases.

14. Registry is, accordingly, directed to encash the Fixed Deposit and out of the maturity amount, transmit a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the Delhi State Legal Services Authority and the balance amount of Rs.4 lakhs and the balance interest accrued thereon be released in favour of the respondent Mr. Pramod Kumar.

15. Petitioner shall also deposit the said amount of Rs.40,000/- with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority and produce a receipt on the next date.

16. In view of the settlement between the parties and payment of the settlement amount by the petitioner, subject offence is compounded and petitioner is acquitted of the subject offence.

17. Petitions are allowed in the above terms.

18. List for reporting compliance on 06.09.2019.

19. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.