Compounding of offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be permitted at any stage, including post-conviction, emphasizing compensatory justice over punitive measures.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr.S.Chandranathan learned counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioners and Mr.M.Raj Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents and also this Court has taken the assistance of Mr.A.Gopinath, learned Govt. Advocate (crl.side).

2. The instant Criminal Revision Case has been filed challenging the conviction and sentence passed in C.A.No.32 of 2017 dated 07.12.2021 by the learned IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Chennai, confirming the conviction and sentence made in C.C.No.3617 of 2014, dated 24.01.2017 passed by the learned Fast Track Court-I (Magistrate Level) Egmore at Allikulam, Chennai.

3. The learned trial Judge has convicted the Revision Petitioners/accused under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced the 2^nd petitioner/A2 who is representing the 1st petitioner/A1 to undergo SI for a period of four months and also directed him to pay a compensation of Rs.6,76,601/- to the complainant, failing which, to undergo SI for one month. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court was also confirmed by the First Appellate Court.

4. The facts leading to filing of this Criminal Revision Case is as follows;

(i) The 2nd petitioner/ A2, who is representing the 1st petitioner/A1company, in order to discharge the legally enforceable debt that arise during the course of business transaction between the revision petitioners and the respondent company, issued three cheques in favour of the respondent company as follows:

(a) Cheque No.111538, dated 20.12.2013 for a sum of Rs.1,25,000/-

(b) Cheque No.111536, dated 02.11.2013 for a sum of Rs.4,23,951/-

(c) Chque No.111539, dated 27.12.2013 fo a sum of Rs.1,27,650/-

All drawn on Punjab National Bank, Periamet Branch, Chennai 600 003.

(ii) When the cheques issued by the Revision Petitioners were presented for encashment by the respondent through its Bankers viz., Oriental Bank of Commerce, Spencer Plaza, Chennai on 28.01.2014, they were returned with an endorsement 'Funds Insufficient' .

(iii) Hence the respondent issued a legal notice dated 10.02.2014 calling upon the revision petitioners to pay the dishonoured cheque amounts within one month there from and the same was received by the revision petitioners on 15.02.2014

(v) On receipt of notice, since the revision petitioners neither replied, nor repaid the dishonoured cheque amounts, the respondent preferred a complaint for the offence of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the revision petitioners.

5. After recording the sworn statement of the respondent and after being satisfied that prima facie case has been made out to proceed further against the Revision Petitioners for the offence under section 138 of NI Act, the trial Court has issued summon to the 2nd Petitioner/A2. On the appearance of the 2nd Petitioner/A2, copies have been furnished and the substance of allegation has been put to him. The 2nd Petitioner/A2 has denied the allegation and has claimed to be tried.

6. After considering the arguments, the learned trial court has found the Revision Petitioners guilty of the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the 2nd petitioner/A2 representing 1st petitioner/A1 has been convicted and sentenced to undergo SI for a period of four months and also directed him to pay a compensation of Rs.6,76,601/- to the respondent, failing which, he was sentenced to undergo SI for one month.

7. Aggrieved by the judgment, the Revision Petitioners have preferred the appeal in Crl.A.No.32 of 2017 before the IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Chennai and the first appellate court dismissed the appeal vide judgment and order dated 07.12.2021 by confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court in