A case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be compounded when parties reach an amicable settlement.

O R D E R

The petitioner herein is the accused in S.T.No.1025/1998 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thrissur, who was convicted and sentenced by the learned Magistrate for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , 1881. The punishment awarded by the Trial Court was simple imprisonment for three months, and a fine of Rs.5,000/-, with a default clause of simple imprisonment for a further period of three months. Though the revision petitioner challenged the above verdict in appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thrissur, who considered the appeal, confirmed the conviction and modified the sentence to simple imprisonment for three months with a further direction to pay compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- under Section 357 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973. Aggrieved by the above verdicts, the revision petitioner has preferred this revision petition before this Court.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the learned counsel for the second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

3. During the course of proceedings in this revision petition, the petitioner and the second respondent settled the issues between them, and filed Crl.M.A.No.1/2026 for compounding the offence. The said application has been allowed by this Court today.

4. Since the issue involved in this revision petition is purely of private nature, and the amount which the revision petitioner was liable to pay to the complainant/second respondent is said to have been paid, there is no need to enforce the sentence awarded by the Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.618/2000. That apart, it is pertinent to note that the complainant as well as the accused has jointly filed the petition requesting to compound the case since they have settled the issues amicably. The learned counsel representing the complainant submitted that the complainant has no subsisting grievance, and that there is absolutely no need to proceed with the conviction and sentence awarded by the courts below upon the revision petitioner, since the issue has been resolved amicably. In the above circumstances, I am of the view that the request of the parties to wind up the proceedings initiated in this case, has to be allowed.

In the result, the revision petition is disposed as follows:

(i) The offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , 1881, which the petitioner was found to have committed as per the judgments of the courts below, is declared to have been lawfully compounded by the parties.

(ii) The judgments rendered by the courts below convicting and sentencing the revision petitioner/accused for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , 1881, are hereby set aside.

(iii) The petitioner/accused is acquitted of the aforesaid offence.

(iv) His bail bond stands cancelled and he is set at liberty.

(Sd/-)