9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (CC No.11828/1/2010) instituted by the second respondent, he being one of the directors (authorized signatory) of company M/s. H.M. Informatics Pvt. Ltd. He had moved an application under Section 147 of the N.I. Act, 1881 praying to the Metropolitan Magistrate that the proceedings in the case be closed as the offence had been compounded on account of settlement of the dispute between the parties. His application was declined by the Metropolitan Magistrate by order dated 05.11.2014. He challenged the said order before the Court of Sessions by criminal revision petition No.08/2015 invoking its revisional jurisdiction. His revision petition was dismissed by order dated 17.07.2015. He has come up to this court invoking the inherent power and j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0,858/- as full and final settlement of its claim, the petitioner having handed over in such context six post-dated cheques to the complainant. The statements of the parties were recorded by the Metropolitan Magistrate on 15.02.2011. The Magistrate, however, kept the case alive awaiting confirmation of payment. 5. On 23.03.2011, the petitioner and other accused persons did not appear. The complainant informed the trial court that first of the six post-dated cheques, upon presentation, had been dishonoured. The trial court issued non-bailable warrants against the petitioner and other accused. Though the warrants were cancelled later on appearance of the accused, the matter kept hanging fire, the petitioner and other accused persons submitti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r is trying to confuse the issue by making endeavour to take advantage of the payments made in the other case against the other company. 10. Reliance is placed by the petitioner on the following observations of the Supreme Court in Meters and Instruments Private Limited & Anr. Vs. Kanchan Mehta, 2017 (4) LRC 287 (SC):- "18. From the above discussion following aspects emerge: (i) Offence under Section 138 of the Act is primarily a civil wrong. Burden of proof is on accused in view presumption under Section 139 but the standard of such proof is "preponderance of probabilities". The same has to be normally tried summarily as per provisions of summary trial under the Cr.P.C. but with such variation as may be appropriate to proceedings under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts Private Limited (supra), the basic object of the law contained in Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is "to enhance credibility of the cheque transactions". The conduct of the petitioner in issuing a postdated cheque (pursuant to a settlement) that failed upon presentation is not one that would "enhance the credibility" of cheque transactions. 12. The complainant, in the hope of realization of its dues, continued to agree to enlargement of time. Some more money was paid, in bits and pieces, by installments, to some extent, over a prolonged period. In a case of this nature, it is naturally the expectation of the complainant (the creditor) that his entire dues would be settled, and this would include not only the principa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
