The main legal point established in the judgment is that the offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable, and the court may permit compounding of the offence with the respondent-complainant on deposit of a specified percentage of the cheque amount by way of costs.

ORDER :

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.

An interesting question that consequent upon a compromise arrived at between the complainant and the accused-respondent in the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, hereinafter referred to as "the Act" in short, the accused-petitioners should be permitted to compound the offence, without imposing costs in accordance with the graded scheme framed by a larger Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babala, (2010) 5 SCC 663, or in the alternative the complaint should be quashed while exercising inherent jurisdiction by the High Court, under Section 482 Cr. P.C., has been brought to this Court for adjudication in these petitions.

2. Since the question hereinabove brought to this Court for adjudication is common in these petitions, therefore, I propose to dispose of the same by a common judgment.

3. Since the point involved in these petitions is legal in nature, therefore, there is no need to give every factual detail and suffice would it to say that the parties, who are common in these appeals, had some business transaction between them. The petitioners, hereinafter referred to as "the accused persons", owed some liability towards the respondent, hereinafter referred to as "the complainant". The accused petitioners, in order to discharge such liability, they owed towards the complainant, issued following cheques on different dates:

4. The total amount under the cheques hereinabove comes to Rs. 82 lacs. The complainant presented the cheques for encashment, but the same were dishonuored and returned to its representative. This has led in issuance of separate legal notices in respect of the bouncing of aforesaid cheques. The accused, however, failed to pay the amount to the complainant after issuance of the legal notice. This has led in filing five separate complaints by the complainant in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No.2, Nalagarh, District Solan.

5. Learned trial Magistrate, after holding the trial, has held the respondents guilty for the commission of offence, punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and consequently, vide judgment dated 26.9.2012, Annexure A-1 in each case, sentenced each of them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and also imposed, upon each of them, the cheque amount, as compensation. Additionally, the complainant was further held entitled to 10% of the cheques amount, as compensation in each case.

6. Aggrieved from their conviction and sentence, the accused persons had preferred criminal appeal No.61-S- 10/2012 in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Solan. It is worthwhile to mention that one Civil Suit No.30 of 2008 for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 119.05 lacs and one Civil Writ Petition, bearing registration No.206 of 2006 filed by accused-petitioner Ram Niwas were also pending disposal. In addition to this, one LPA bearing registration No.86/2010 against the order dated 6.4.2010 in CWP No.206/2010, is also pending disposal in this Court.

7. During the pendency of the appeals before the Sessions Judge as well as the Civil Suit and the Writ Petition before this Court, the parties arrived at a compromise and settled their claims and counter claims amicably on 27th April, 2013. Deed of compromise is Annexure A-2 (colly). In the amicable settlement