Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2022 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 88 - TELANGANA HIGH COURTDishonor of Cheque - legally enforceable debt - rebuttal of presumptions in favour of the complainant under Sections 118 and 139 of N.I. Act - modification of sentence of imprisonment to fine - HELD THAT:- On a perusal of the record, the Trial Court observed that the accused was not disputing his signature on the cheque, as such, the presumption envisaged under Section 118 of N.I. Act that the cheque was drawn for consideration on the date which the cheque bore, and Section 139 of N.I. Act would enjoin on the Court to presume that the holder of the cheque received it for the discharge of debt or liability and that the accused failed to adduce any probable defence to show that he had not received money from the complainant and failed to adduce rebuttal evidence to discharge the burden laid upon him and did not place any iota of evidence under what circumstances the cheques were issued to the complainant, and held that the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act was proved against the accused. When the matter is taken up for hearing on 23.08.2022, learned counsel for the revision petitioner / accused stated that the revision petitioner / accused was ready to pay the amount of Rs.2,25,000/- as agreed before the Court on 04.02.2022. But the learned counsel for the respondent / complainant stated that the complainant is not ready for compromise as the accused had not produced the Demand Draft even on the said date. Considering the object of the Act, it is considered fit to modify the sentence of imprisonment to fine and to pay the same as compensation to the complainant for the amount directed by this Court on 04.02.2020. As the revision petitioner / accused reported ready to pay the amount as suggested by this Court on 04.02.2020, and as stated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Meters and Instruments Private Limited [2017 (10) TMI 218 - SUPREME COURT] that though compounding requires consent of both parties, even in the absence of such consent, the Court, in the interest of justice, on being satisfied that the complainant has been duly compensated, can in its discretion close the proceedings and discharge the accused, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed on condition of the revision petitioner / accused to produce the Demand Draft for an amount of Rs.2,25,000/- within a week from the date of pronouncement of order. Revision closed.
|