The court established that offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be compounded post-conviction, prioritizing settlement over punishment.

ORDER

1. Accused-petitioner has preferred this revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. to challenge judgment dated 21.05.2017, passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Jodhpur Metro (for short, 'learned appellate Court'), whereby learned appellate Court has confirmed judgment dated 04.03.2017, rendered by Special Metropolitan Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.l, Jodhpur Metro (for short, 'learned trial Court'). The learned trial Court, by its verdict dated 04.03.2017, indicted accused-petitioner for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'Act') and handed down sentence of one year's simple imprisonment. Besides imprisonment, the learned trial Court has also ordered that accused-petitioner should pay fine to the complainant to the tune to Rs.2,90,000/- and in default of payment of compensation to further undergo two months' simple imprisonment-. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner approached learned appellate Court but that effort did not fructify to his advantage as the learned appellate Court dismissed his appeal. This sort of situation has necessitated filing of this revision petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now rival parties have sorted out their dispute and compromise has been arrived at between the parties and respondent No.2-complainant has received all the amount from the petitioner, therefore, no amount is now due between the parties. With this positive assertion, learned counsel has urged that both the impugned judgments be annulled and sentence handed down by learned trial Court and confirmed by learned appellate Court be set aside. The copy of the compromise is already placed on record. With these submissions, it is prayed that the matter may be decided in the light of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babulal H. reported in 2010 (5) SCC 663.

3. Learned counsel for the complainant, while acknowledging the compromise arrived at between the parties, would urge that looking to the nature of offence and in the wake of settlement of dispute between rival parties, the conviction recorded by learned trial Court and upheld by the learned appellate Court merits annulment.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the accused-petitioner and learned counsel for the complainant and perused the compromise arrived at between the parties.

5. Chapter XVII of the Act deals with penalties in case of dishonor of cheques for insufficiency of funds in the accounts. A complete procedure in this behalf is provided under Section 138 to 147 of the Act. Section 142 deals with cognizance of offence and Section 143 empowers a Court to try cases under Section 138 of the Act summarily. As per Section 147 of the Act, every offence punishable under the Act is compoundable notwithstanding anything contained in the Cr.P.C. While it is true that the offence is compoundable but a pivotal question, which has emerged for consideration, is whether revisional powers can be exercised by this Court to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Act after conviction of the petitioner by appellate Court. The legal position in this behalf was fluid until the judgment rendered in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. [(2010) 5 SCC 663] by the Supreme Court. In the said verdict, Supreme Court has examined the provisions of Section 138 and 147 of the Act threadbare and observed that compensatory aspect of the remedy should be given priority over the punitive aspect. While discussing object of Section 138 of the Act, the Court held:

"However, there are some larger issues which can be appropriately addressed in the context of the present case. It may be recalled that Chapter XVII comprising Section 138 to 142 was inserted into the Act by the Banking, Public Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Laws (Amendment) Act, 1988 (66 of 1988). The object of bringing Section 138 into the statute was to inculcate faith in the efficacy of banking opera