CRR-1020-2023

-1-

2023:PHHC:055566

109

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CRR-1020-2023 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 19.04.2023

Jagsir Singh

..... Petitioner

Versus

Gurmeet Singh and another

.......Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Mr. Achin Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Nirmaljeet Singh Sidhu, Advocate, for respondent No.1.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (Oral)

This revision has been filed by the petitioner impugning the

order dated 17.03.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bathinda,

whereby, the conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioner under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a complaint case CIS

No.COMA-3792-2019 by the Court of learned JMIC, Bathinda, vide order

dated 07.07.2022 has been upheld.

As per facts of the case, the accused-petitioner was having

cordial relations with the complainant-respondent and by taking benefit of

cordial relations, he took a friendly loan of Rs.6,75,000/- from the

complainant. In order to discharge his legal enforceable liability towards the

complainant, the accused-petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.851151

dated 18.07.2019 for an amount of Rs.6,75,000/- drawn on Punjab National

Bank, Civil Lines Branch, District Bathinda in favour of the complainant

with an assurance that the same shall be honoured as and when presented

for its encashment. On presentation, the cheque was dishonoured vide

cheque returning memo dated 04.10.2019 with remarks “Account Closed”.

SHARMILA DEVI

2023.04.21 10:26

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CRR-1020-2023

-2-

2023:PHHC:055566

Thereafter, the respondent-complainant sent a legal notice dated 14.10.2019

to the petitioner intimating him about the dishonour of said cheque and

calling upon him to make the payment to him within a period of 15 days

from the date of receipt of the notice but despite that the petitioner failed to

make payment and thus, complaint was filed. On the conclusion of trial, the

petitioner was convicted and sentenced under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two

years. He was also burdened with compensation of Rs.6,75,000/- alongwith

interest @ 9% per annum from the date of issuance of cheque in question

till the date of order, to be payable to the complainant. Aggrieved by the

same, the petitioner filed an appeal and the learned Appellate Court

dismissed the same vide order dated 17.03.2023. Hence, the petitioner has

approached this Court by way of filing the present revision petition

challenging the above said orders.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after the

conviction and sentence by both the Courts below, with the intervention of

the respectables, the matter has been settled between the petitioner and the

complainant-respondent No.1 and respondent No.1 has no objection if the

conviction and sentence of the petitioner is set aside. He submits that the

compromise arrived at between the parties is annexed with the petition as

Annexure P-1. He submits that a separate application for compounding the

offence is also filed alongwith the present revision. He has submitted that

the parties have settled the dispute for Rs.6,50,000/- to be paid by the

petitioner to the complainant and the said amount has been paid to the

complainant-respondent and now nothing is due against him. He has further

submitted that once the parties have settled the dispute amicably, then in

SHARMILA DEVI

2023.04.21 10:26

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CRR-1020-2023

-3-

2023:PHHC:055566

view of the law settled, the petitioner be allowed to compound the offence

and he be acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayad Babalal H. 2010(2) RCR (