Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2021 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (5) TMI 403 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - initiation of Criminal Case - Whether a criminal case initiated under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, after ending in conviction and reach its logical end, shall it be reopened and compounded under Section 147 of Negotiable Instrument Act by invoking Section 482 of Cr.P.C., overriding the embargo under Section 362 of Cr.P.C.? - Compounding of Offences - HELD THAT:- A reading of Sections 4 and 5 of Cr.P.C. clearly shows that enquiry, investigation and trial of the offence(s), whether under the Indian Penal Code or any other Special Act, the procedure(s) under the Cr.P.C. have to be followed, unless Special Act provides the procedure(s) to be followed thereof. In this case, for trial of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, except certain specific deviations made under Sections 140, 142 and 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the provisions under the Cr.P.C. have to be followed. The complaint, appeal and revision petitions are to be filed under the provisions of the Cr.P.C. Sub-section (9) of Section 320 Cr.P.C. provides a specific bar for compounding an offence, except where it is otherwise provided. Further, under Section 320 (5), (6), (7) and (9) of Cr.P.C., there is an embargo for compounding an offence once there is conviction. This is the view of the Supreme Court as well. The substantive law settled in the context of the offences under the IPC, is applicable to the offences triable under the N.I. Act and other special Legislations.Compounding of offences is permissible even at all appellate stages with permission or during the pendency of the revision under Section 401 of the Act. Therefore, not only the offences under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, but the other offence(s) under the Special Act cannot be compounded, except under Section 320 Cr.P.C.Sections 138 to 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were inserted by Banking Public Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Laws (Amendment) Act, 1988, with the object of providing a speedy remedy apart from inculcating faith in the efficacy of Banking operations and credibility in business transactions relating to the Negotiable Instruments. Thus, it is an essential facet for the "economic development" of a country - the offence(s) which are not provided under Section 320 Cr.P.C., cannot be compounded and if it is allowed to be compounded, it will have the effect of "acquittal" by setting aside the conviction and sentence on the basis of the subsequent compromise entered into between the parties. The present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable before this Court for reviewing or recalling a judgment, which was already passed by this Court by confirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the respondent/accused, by the trial Court. Such power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are boundless - the respondent in this case pleaded not guilty before the trial court, appellate Court at the first instance, as well as this Court in the appeal against acquittal, but such a plea was over-turned and he was convicted for having committed the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. While so, the present petition seeking to accept the compromise entered into between the parties, is nothing short of an abuse of process of law. Thus, when once a Criminal Case registered under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, had handed down the conviction either in the Appeal or in the Revision by the High Court, the question of compounding of the offence(s) thereafter under Section 147 of the N.I. Act by invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not permissible - petition rejected.
|