IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on : 29.08.2025 Date of decision: 02.09.2025 Rajiv Kumar ......Petitioner(s)

VERSUS M/s. JAECO Diesels .......Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ *****

Present: - Mr. Harmanpreet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Chetan Bansal, Advocate for the respondent.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.

1. The instant revision petition has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 28.08.2017 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amritsar vide which the petitioner had been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of One and a half years with a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the impugned judgment dated 03.03.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide which appeal preferred by the petitioner(s) has/have been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that after filing of the instant petition, the matter has been amicably resolved between the parties and entire due amount stands paid by the family members of the petitioner. Affidavit executed by the respondent is at Annexure A-1. He thus prays that the case in hand be permitted to be compounded as per Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The relevant provisions of the Act reads thus:-

“147 Offences to be compoundable.

Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable.”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has acknowledged that the entire amount already stands remitted and that he has no objection to the offence being compounded under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

4. The issue regarding compounding under the Negotiable Instruments Act at the stage of appeal as well as revision has come before this court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and they have upheld that the powers under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be invoked at any stage of the proceedings i.e. at the stage of trial, appeal or at the revisional jurisdiction and that the courts should be liberal in exercising such powers.

5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of K.M. Ibrahim Vs. K.P Mohammed & Another, passed in Criminal Appeal No.2281 of 2009 decided on 02.12.2009 held as under:-

“5. Appearing for the appellant, Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, learned Senior Advocate, contended that since a specific power had been given to the parties to a proceeding under the Negotiable Instruments Act under Section 147 to compound the offence, there could be no reason as to why the same cannot be permitted even after conviction, which had been affirmed upto the High Court. It was urged that in order to facilitate settlement of disputes, the legislature thought it fit to insert Section 147 by Amending Act 55 of 2002. Such amendment came into effect from 6th February, 2003, and provided that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, every offence punishable under the Act would be compoundable.

6. Mr. Rohtagi urged that in view of the nonobstante clause, the provisions of Section 147 were given an overriding effect over the Code and in view of the clear mandate given to the parties to compound an offence under the Act, reference to Section 320 Cr.P.C. can be made for purposes of comparison only in order to understand the scope of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

7. Mr. Rohtagi submitted that the said position had been accepted by this Court in various decisions, such as in the case of O.P. Dholakia vs. State of Haryana & Anr. [(2000) 1 SCC 762], wherein it was held that since the petitioner had already entered into a compromise with the complainant and the complainant had appeared through counsel and stated that the entire money had been received by him and he had no objection if the conviction already re