SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Raj) 44

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J
Parasmal - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
CRLR / 317 / 2025
Decided On : 06-03-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Hukum Singh Chouhan, Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG, Mr. K.S. Kumpawat, AAAG, Ms. Varsha Purohit

A compromise under Section 147 of the NI Act allows for setting aside a conviction for dishonor of cheque, provided the complainant does not wish to proceed and costs are deposited.

Headnote:

(A) Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 and Section 147 - Conviction and sentencing for dishonor of cheque - The petitioner was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,00,000/- for the offence under Section 138, which was affirmed by the appellate court. The parties entered into a compromise, and the complainant does not wish to proceed with the matter. The court set aside the sentence based on the compromise, imposing a cost of 15% of the cheque amount to be deposited with the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority. (Paras 2, 5, 6)

(B) Compromise in Lok Adalat - The court recognized the validity of a compromise reached between the parties, allowing for the setting aside of the conviction and sentence under Section 138 NI Act, subject to the condition of cost deposition. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was convicted for dishonor of a cheque, sentenced to imprisonment, and fined. Following a compromise with the complainant, the petitioner sought to set aside the sentence, which was supported by the complainant.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the compromise was valid and set aside the conviction and sentence, imposing a cost on the petitioner.

Issues: The main issue was whether the conviction and sentence could be set aside based on the compromise between the parties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the compromise was valid under Section 147 of the NI Act, allowing for the setting aside of the conviction and sentence, provided the petitioner deposited a cost as directed.

Result: Revision petition allowed.

ORDER :

MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.

1.The matter is being heard and decided today itself.

2. This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 17.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.6, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Appeal No.363/2023 (N.C.V. No.363/2023), by which, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment dated 31.07.2023 passed by the learned Special Metropolitan Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.6, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Original Case No.394/2016 convicting and sentencing the petitioner for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act has been affirmed. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo six months’ simple imprisonment along with fine in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo two months’ simple imprisonment. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and complainant-respondent No.2 have entered into a compromise in the spirit of Lok Adalat and the respondent No.2 has received all the amount from the petitioner and does not want to proceed with the matter, therefore the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner may be set aside.

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 concurs with the facts stated by the counsel for the petitioner.

4. I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for the parties.

5. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, since the parties have settled their dispute and complainant respondent No.2 has accepted the sum towards full and final settlement of dispute on the satisfaction of the complainant and in the light of provisions of Section 147 of NI Act and in view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. reported in 2010 (5) SCC 663 , the sentence awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act is liable to be set aside. However, since the compromise has been arrived at after rejection of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, a cost of 15% of the cheque amount deserves to be imposed upon the petitioner in light of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra).

6. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner for offence under Section 138 NI Act vide judgment dated 17.02.2025 and 31.07.2023 are hereby set aside on the basis of the aforesaid compromise subject to deposition of cost of 15% of the cheque amount. The cost shall be deposited by the petitioner before the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur within a period of one month from today. In case, the cost is not deposited by the petitioner before the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur within the stipulated period, the revision petition may be listed before this Court for passing appropriate orders.

7. The revision petition is allowed in the above terms. Suspension of sentence application also stands decided accordingly.

8. A copy of this order be sent to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top