TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntive sentence of simple imprisonment imposed in this case shall stand modified and substituted in lieu of the amount of compensation of ₹ 2,70,000/- that stands already paid by the petitioner - learned trial Court is also directed to release the amount of ₹ 27,000/- deposited in this case by the petitioner to complainant /respondent No.1-Bank as per procedure. Petition disposed off. - Cr. Revision No. 65 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 30-10-2018 - Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohan Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Ms. Devyani Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Vinod Thakur and Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, Addl. A.Gs. with Mr. Bhupinder Thakur Dy. A.G. Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral). Looking to the nature of order, I propose to pass, it is not at all necessary to delve into the facts in detail. Suffice it to state that the complainant/respondent No.1 instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short Act ) against the petitioner on the allegations that in order to liquidate the overdue amount, the petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.120941 for a sum of ₹ 2,30,000/- on 7.2.2012 to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot question is whether the Court in such like cases can set aside the judgments of conviction and sentence where the petitioner has been charged under Section 138 of the Act. This question need not detain this Court any longer in view of the three Judges Bench decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai and others versus State of Gujarat and another, Criminal Appeal No. 1723 of 2017 , decided on 4th October, 2017, wherein after taking into consideration the entire law on the subject, the Hon ble Supreme Court has laid down the following broad principles for exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code which read thus:- (i) Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court; (ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would cause oppression and prejudice; and (x) There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions (viii) and (ix) above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the state have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance. 6. Apart from the above, it shall be apposite to make note of another recent judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Meters and Instruments Private Limited and another versus Kanchan Mehta (2018) 1 SCC 560 wherein after taking into consideration the object of introducing Section 138 and other provisions of Chapter XVII in the Act in the year 1988, it was observed as under:- 18. From the above discussion following aspects emerge: 18.1. 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecomes necessary, where sentence of one year may have to be awarded and compensation under Section 357(3) is considered inadequate, having regard to the amount of the cheque, the financial capacity and the conduct of the accused or any other circumstances. 7. It is evident from the aforesaid judgment that this Court after being satisfied that the cheque amount with the assessed cost and interest has been paid, can close the proceedings even in absence of the complainant. 8. The issue is no longer res integra in view of the very recent judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Bhangu Trading Co. and another versus Surjit Singh (dead) through LRs, Criminal Appeal Nos. 808 and 809 of 2018 decided on 02.07.2018 and in terms of the subsequent judgment in N.P. Murugesan versus C. Krishnamurthy, Criminal Appeal No.818 of 2018, decided on 04.07.2018, wherein it was observed as under:- Leave granted. 2 . The appellant is before this Court aggrieved by the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 3. Today, when the matter came up before this Court, we are informed that the cheque amount has already been paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
