IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Poonam A. Bamba, J.
Safety Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Gopi Ram - Respondent
Crl.M.C. 3125 of 2022, Crl.M.A. 13189 of 2022
Decided On : 09-12-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges prior court orders (Para 1) |
| 2. factual background of the case (Para 2) |
JUDGMENT
Poonam A. Bamba, J.:
CRL.M.C. 3125/2022
1.0. Vide this petition, the petitioner is assailing orders dated 07.12.2021 and 11.05.2022 ("impugned orders" in short) passed by the Ld. ASJ - 04, (South-West District), in Criminal Appeal No. 445/2019 under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("NI Act" in short) and is seeking the following reliefs:
(a) quash the impugned orders dated 07.12.2021 and 11.05.2022 passed by the Ld. ASJ - 04, (South West District), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in Criminal Appeal no. 44/2019 titled as Safety Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd. & another vs. Shri Gopi Ram; and
(b) direct that the land in question which is in7 possession of the respondent may be treated as sufficient security in place of deposit of an amount of Rs. 1,90,00,000/- in the form of FDR; and
(c) Pass any other7 or further orders which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, in favour of the petitioner."
2.0. Briefly put, the facts relevant for disposal of the instant petition are that:
i. the respondent/complainant had filed a complaint bearing CC No. 4990027/16 under Section 138 NI Act against the petitioners herein and Ms IOCL Officer's Welfare Society ("IOCL" in short) and Bijoy Kumar Sharma, Secretary & Authorized Signatory of Ms IOCL;
ii. as per the complaint, the petitioners/accused persons had purchased agricultural land in Revenue Estate of village Hassnpur, Tehsil Kapashera, New Delhi from the complainant for a total sum of Rs. 24,33,72,800/- vide registered sale deed dated 07.11.2014. The consideration amount was paid by the accused/petitioners by way of cheques of Rs 22 lakhs (two cheques of Rs. 11 lakh each) and three cheques bearing nos. 000906, 000905 and 000904, all dated 07.11.2014 for Rs. 4,38,00,000/-, Rs. 7,00,00,000/-, and Rs. 10,50,00,000/- respectively. Except two cheques of Rs. 11 lakh each, other cheques were dishonoured and were returned by the bank with remarks "Funds insufficient" and "drawers signature differ" vide return memos dated 02.01.2015, 03.01.2015 and 06.01.2015. As the said amount remained unpaid despite notice, the respondent had filed the aforesaid complaint;
iii. in the said complaint, the petitioner no. 1 herein (accused no. 2) i.e. M/s. Safety Energy Solutions Private Limited ('M/s. Safety Energy' in short) being the drawer of the cheques and the petitioner no. 2 herein i.e. U.P. Singh, director of petitioner no. 1 (accused no. 4) being the signatory of the cheques in question, were convicted by Ld. M.M. (N.I.Act-07), South-West, Dwarka, Delhi vide judgment dated 17.07.2019. Vide order dated 05.08.2019, the Ld. M.M. sentenced the petitioners, as under:
"Convict no. 1 M/s Safety Energy is a company which is represented by Sh.U.P. Singh (convict No. 2). It is pertinent to mention that the convict no. 2 has settled the matter before the court on 10.05.2016 for a sum of Rs.17 crores 50 lakhs. The convicts did not comply with the terms and conditions of the settlement.
Considering the totality of circumstances, convict no. 2 (Sh. U.P. Singh) is sentenced to simple imprisonment for six months and is further ordered to pay compensation to son/LR of the complainant for an amount of Rs.10.0 crores (Rs. Ten crores only) under Section 357 Cr.P.C. Convict no. 1 (M/s Safety Energy) is directed to pay the compensation of Rs.10.0 crores to son/LR of the complainant. In default of payment of compensation, convict no. 2 (Sh. U.P. Singh) shall undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months.
It is hereby clarified that the compensation is granted after taking into account the payment of rs.4 crores 38 lakhs already made to the complainant by the convicts."
iv. aggrieved by the aforesaid judgement and order on sentence, the petitioners herein preferred an appeal before the Ld. ASJ vide Criminal Appeal no. 445/2019 and also prayed for suspensi
The appellate court upheld the necessity for a minimum deposit of 20% of compensation under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, confirming compliance is essential to maintain the right of ....
The requirement to deposit at least 20% of the compensation under the Act during an appeal is a mandatory rule. Waiver of this condition is limited to rare, exceptional cases where specific, justifia....
The aim of Section 148 NI Act is to provide relief to the complainant by empowering the Appellate Court to direct payment of a portion of the fine/compensation during the pendency of appeal. The vaca....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the legal implications of default in complying with a settlement and the applicability of Section 148 of the NI Act to appeals against the order of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the retrospective applicability of Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the mandatory nature of the Appellate Court's discretion to direc....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.