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

2015 Supreme(P&H) 429

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
M.M. Singh Bedi, J.
R.P. Singh - Appellant
Versus
Jaswinder Singh - Respondent
C.R.R. No. 3588 of 2014 (O&M)
Decided On : 12-01-2015

Advocates:
For the Appellant :Navkiran Singh, Advocate

Compounding of the dispute under the Negotiable Instruments Act and setting aside of conviction order.

Headnote:

Negotiable Instruments Act - Dishonour of Cheque - Compounding of Dispute

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonouring a cheque of `2 lacs. The petitioner agreed to repay the amount and compound the dispute by relying upon a previous judgment.

Finding of the Court:

The court disposed of the revision petition as compounded, setting aside the conviction order passed by the lower courts in view of the amount paid.

Issues: Concurrent conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, compounding of the dispute, and bail conditions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the deposit of the amount for compounding and unnecessary harassment and compensation, and the lack of appearance by the respondent to controvert the petitioner's contention.

Final Decision: The revision petition was disposed of as compounded, and the conviction order passed by the lower courts was set aside.

M.M. Singh Bedi, J.

1. This is a revision petition against the concurrent conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of ` 20,000/- in a case of dishonouring of cheque of ` 2 lacs. The petitioner had agreed to repay the amount and compound the dispute by relying upon the judgment in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., 2010 (2) R.C.R. (Crl.) 851. Petitioner was granted the concession of bail subject to depositing of ` 2,75,000/- which included ` 2,30,000/- for compounding and ` 45,000/- as costs for unnecessary harassment and compensation in addition to sum of ` 20,000/- which has already been deposited by the petitioner. It has been informed that the amount has been deposited and released to the complainant.

2. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent to controvert the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner despite service.

3. In view of the above said circumstances, the revision petition is disposed of as compounded. Conviction order passed by the Courts below are set aside as compounded in view of the amount paid.

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