Compounding of offences under Section 138 of the N.I. Act requires pending proceedings; post-conviction petitions cannot invoke inherent powers to review judgments.

JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, J.

Petitioners have filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNSS’), for quashing the judgment of conviction dated 24.11.2018 and order of sentence dated 20.12.2018, passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Shimla (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’), in Criminal Case No.2407/3 of 2014/13, titled as Idyll Institute of Computer Education Pvt. Ltd versus Sai Infotech Tutu & Another.

2. By way of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, as referred to above, the learned trial Court has convicted the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the N.I. Act’) and sentenced petitioner No.2, Subhash Singta, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a sum of Rs.2,10,000/-, as compensation. In default of payment of compensation, petitioner No.2, has further been directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of fifteen days.

3. Thereafter, the petitioners have challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, as referred to above, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Shimla, (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal No.2-S/10 of 2019, titled as Sai Infotech Tutu & Another vs. Idyll Institute of Computer, which was dismissed on 20.04.2024.

4. The petitioners had preferred Criminal Revision No.168 of 2021, titled as Sai Infotech Tutu Gyan Bhawan and Another versus Idyll Institute of Computer Education Pvt. Ltd., before this Court, which was also dismissed on 4.11.2024.

5. Now, by way of the present petition, a prayer has been made to quash the proceedings, mainly on the ground that the petitioners are now ready and willing to settle the matter with the complainant and are also ready to deposit the entire remaining amount. Hence, a prayer has been made to allow the petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has made efforts to justify the present petition, by arguing that the offence, punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, is compoundable and the same can be compounded, at any stage.

7. To buttress her contentions, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has relied upon the decision of a coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.MMO No.674 of 2024 titled as Satvir Singh versus Rajesh Pathania & Another decided on 19.7.2024.

8. The main ground upon which, the present petition has been filed, is that, the petitioners are now ready to compound the offence.

9. Admittedly, in this case, the petitioners have not availed the remedy to assail the order, passed by this Court, on 4.11.2024, dismissing Cr. Revision No.168 of 2021, which was filed against the judgment, passed by the learned First Appellate Court, by virtue of which, the appeal preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, passed by the learned trial Court, was dismissed.

10. In such situation, the first and foremost question, which arises for determination, before this Court is, as to whether the bar, as, contained, under Section 362 of the Cr.PC (now 403 of the BNSS), can be ignored, by exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.PC. (Section 528 BNSS).

11. If the present petition is accepted, as prayed for, it would be nothing, but, interfering with the judgment, passed by this Court, on 4.11.2024, by virtue which, the Criminal Revision No.168 of 2021, was dismissed.

12. In other words, the acceptance of the prayer would amount to review the judgment of the same Court, which has earlier dismissed the Revision Petition. The said course is not legally permissible under law, in view of the bar created by Section 362 Cr.PC.

13. Admittedly, at present, no proceedings are pending between the parties before this Court or before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Although, compounding can be done, at any stage, but, for invok