Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 348 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Dishonour of Cheque - insufficient funds - compounding of offence - HELD THAT:- Having taken note of the fact that the entire amount of compensation, i.e., Rs.45,000/-, as awarded by the learned Trial Court, has been received by the complainant-respondent and the complainant has no objection in compounding the offence, therefore, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the accused-petitioner for compounding of offence while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act as well as in terms of guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in DAMODAR S. PRABHU VERSUS SAYED BABALAL H. [2010 (5) TMI 380 - SUPREME COURT], wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that Any costs imposed in accordance with these guidelines should be deposited with the Legal Services Authority operating at the level of the Court before which compounding takes place. For instance, in case of compounding during the pendency of proceedings before a Magistrate’s Court or a Court of Sessions, such costs should be deposited with the District Legal Services Authority.
In K. SUBRAMANIAN VERSUS R. RAJATHI REP. BY P.O.A.P. KALIAPPAN [2009 (11) TMI 1013 - SUPREME COURT], it has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that in view of the provisions contained in Section 147 of the Act read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C., compromise arrived at can be accepted even after recording of the judgment of conviction.
Since, in the instant case, the petitioner-accused after being convicted under Section 138 of the Act, has already paid the entire amount of compensation to the complainant-respondent, prayer for compounding the offence can be accepted in terms of the aforesaid judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court - the parties are permitted to get the matter compounded in light of the compromise arrived inter se them. The compounding fee in the sum of Rs.2250/- has already been deposited by the petitioner before H.P. State Legal Services Authority, as per the directions of this Court.
The present matter is ordered to be compounded and the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.09.2018, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 2, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P. is quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. Bail bonds, if any, stand discharged - Petition disposed off.