Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Harvinder Pal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Rajinder Kaur – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Harpreet Singh Brar, J.
This common order shall dispose of the aforementioned revision petitions as they arise from a similar factual matrix. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are taken from CRR-2717-2024.
2. The present revision petition(s) has been filed for setting aside the impugned judgment dated 23.12.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide which the appeal(s) filed by the petitioner(s) against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.10.2018 (in CRR-2717-2024) and impugned judgment of conviction dated 04.07.2017 and order of sentence dated 05.07.2017 (in CRR-2716-2024) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chandigarh, has been dismissed.
3. The factual background of the case is that a complaint under Section 138 of NI Act was filed against the petitioner(s) on the ground of dishonouring of a cheque bearing No.394012 dated 30.09.2015 amounting to Rs.10,00,000/- (in CRR-2717-2024) and a cheque bearing No.104741 dated 30.08.2015 amounting to Rs.15,00,000/- (in CRR-2716-2024), issued in favour of the complainant/respondent by the petitioner(s) in discharge of his/her liability. Further, the
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act allows for compounding of offenses upon mutual consent of the parties, emphasizing compensatory over punitive aspects.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
