At, High Court of Himachal Pradesh
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
For the Petitioner: Jagat Pal, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1, AshwaniKaundal, Advocate, R2, Shiv Pal Manhans, Addl. Advocate General, R.P. Singh, Raju Ram Rahi, Deputy Advocate Generals.
1. Present Revision Petition has been filed assailing judgment passed by learned Sessions Judge (Forests), Shimla, H.P. in Cr. Appeal RBT No. 19-S/10 of 2017/16, dated 19.04.2017, affirming the judgment and order of conviction passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Shimla, H.P., dated 15.9.2015/14.3.2016, in Criminal Case No.1342-3 of 2014-13, convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay fine of Rs.3,00,000/-, as compensation.
2. Petitioner and Sh. NeerajKashyap, authorized representative of respondent No.1/complainant, present in person in the Court, states that matter has been amicably settled and as per compromise, the respondent No.1/complainant has received entire amount to its full satisfaction and therefore, has agreed to withdraw the present complaint and intend to compound the proceedings initiated by it against the petitioner/accused. Separate statement of Sh. NeerajKashyap, authorized representative of respondent No.1/complainant has also been recorded on oath.
3. Consequently, respondent/complainant is permitted to withdraw the complaint and matter is compounded and complaint arising out of dishonor of cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is permitted to be withdrawn and judgments of conviction and sentence passed by learned Courts below are quashed and set aside. Petitioner- accused is acquitted of the accusation framed against him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a driver by profession and he is not in a position to pay 15% compounding fee and therefore, he prays for exemption from compounding fee. He has relied upon judgments of Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., III (2010) BC 110 (SC)=II (2010) CCR 286 (SC)=III (2010) SLT 533=169 (2010) DLT 1 (SC)=2010 (5) SCC 663 and clarified in M.P. State Legal Services Authorities v. Prateek Jain and Another, IV (2014) BC 392 (SC)=VIII (2014) SLT 207=2014 (10) SCC 690. In peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner/accused is directed to pay Rs.7,000/- as compounding fee, instead of 15% of cheque amount with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority within six weeks from today.
5. After depositing compounding fee/cost, petitioner shall place copy of receipt of deposit on record of this petition. In case of default in depositing compounding fee/cost with H.P. State Legal Service Authority, Shimla within six weeks from today, the
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
judgments of conviction and sentence shall automatically revive. 6. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy of this judgment be also sent to H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla. Copy Dasti.