Compounding of offence after conviction -- Compromise after 10 years of litigation -- A sum of Rs.69 lakhs paid to the complainant -- Looking to the quantification of default amount, an additional sum of Rs. 5 lakhs ordered to be deposited by the petitioner with the Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Advocates Welfare Fund within a period of two months.

(SC) Decided on: 18.10.2022

Reduction in sentence – Cheque amount was Rs.70,000/- -- Sentence was to pay twice the amount of cheque and to suffer imprisonment for one month -- Amount of fine of Rs.1,40,000/- paid, sentence modified to Rs.1,40,000/- apart from the litigation expenses of Rs.50,000/- by setting aside the order of imprisonment for one month.

(SC) Decided on: 13.10.2022

Compromise/ Settlement between parties – Recalling of order -- Leave granted, impugned order upholding the conviction of the appellant would be treated as settled and compounded -- Appeal allowed.

(SC) Decided on: 08.08.2022

Revision -- Allegation of forgery against complainant -- Had that been the case, the accused would have certainly filed a criminal complaint in that regard -- No effort has been made to examine any expert either -- Further, there is no denial by the petitioner to the signatures upon the cheque -- Except bald assertion, the accused has not been able to raise a probable defence even while referring to the cross-examination of the complainant and his witnesses – No infirmity in the judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court affirmed by the ld. Appellate Court – No merit, revision dismissed.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 21.07.2022

Reduction of sentence to fine, default sentence intact -- Cheque of Rs.3 Lacs – Conviction by Trial Court for one year with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof the appellant was directed to undergo S.I. for six months -- Considering the fact that the appellant is an old lady of 69 years, the substantive sentence substituted by fine in the sum of Rs.50,000/- in addition to the fine already deposited by the appellant; Rs.55,000/- shall be the sentence for the offences committed by the appellant -- Default sentence awarded by the trial court as affirmed by the first appellate court and the High Court kept intact.

(SC) Decided on: 19.05.2022

Reduction of sentence to fine, default sentence intact -- Cheque of Rs.3 Lacs – Conviction by Trial Court for one year with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof the appellant was directed to undergo S.I. for six months -- Considering the fact that the appellant is an old lady of 69 years, the substantive sentence substituted by fine in the sum of Rs.50,000/- in addition to the fine already deposited by the appellant; Rs.55,000/- shall be the sentence for the offences committed by the appellant -- Default sentence awarded by the trial court as affirmed by the first appellate court and the High Court kept intact.

(SC) Decided on: 19.05.2022

Suspension of sentence -- Pre-condition to deposit 20% of compensation – Held, pre-condition as imposed by the Additional Sessions judge, cannot be found fault with, being legal and in consonance with the provisions of Section 148 of the N.I. Act, 1881.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 26.04.2022

Suspension of sentence in appeal – Pre-condition to deposit 20% of compensation -- Petitioner was directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount, as a pre-condition for his suspension of sentence during the pendency of the appeal – Petition seeking quashing/setting aside of the order dismissed.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 07.04.2022

Compromise at revisional stage – Waiver of cost of 15% of cheque amount -- Petitioner has a poor financial condition, 51 year old lady who is stated to be having no source of livelihood -- Court deemed it appropriate that no costs should be imposed upon the petitioner -- Revision allowed and judgments of Lower Courts set aside and the petitioner acquitted.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 04.04.2022

Non-deposit of 20% compensation within 60 days -- Lower Appellate Court directed to take necessary steps to hear the appeal and dispose off the same in the given time.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 15.03.2022

Suspension of sentence with pre-condition of deposit of 20% of cheque amount given as compensation – Court proceeded to modify the impugned order, through a direction to deposit 10% amount of the disputed cheque amount, before the learned trial Court concerned.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 11.02.2022

Suspension of sentence on furnishing of personal and surety bonds in the sum of Rs. 1 Lakh – Later on an application by complainant, Appellate Court proceeded to direct the appellant, to pay an amount of Rs. 2,30,000/- comprising 20% of the compensation amount to the complainant within one month – De hors finality being assignable to P-3/order suspending sentence, High Court directed the convict / petitioner to deposit 15% of the cheque amount before the learned Appellate Court within one month.

(P&H HC) Decided on:11.01.2022

Non-compliance of 20% deposit of compensation – Cancellation of bail -- After a period of about more than 2 ½ years, the petitioner approached High Court for setting aside the impugned orders – Held, conduct of the petitioner itself shows that he is adopting dilatory tactics in order to evade and avoid the payment of compensation -- Petition dismissed.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 22.11.2021

Suspension of sentence – Pre-deposit of 20% of compensation amount – Non-waiver of – Reasoning for – Requirement of -- It is not forth coming from the order that the pleas raised by the petitioner for waiver of pre-deposit were dealt with, it is so, as the Court proceeded on the basis that there is no discretion for waiver -- Impugned orders are set aside.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 01.10.2021

Conviction on 17.8.2018 -- Appeal preferred by petitioner -- Challenge to the order passed Appellate Court whereby he has been directed to deposit 20 % of the compensation amount -- Contends that as the complaint has been filed prior to the amendment of Section 148, the same was not applicable to the case of the petitioner – Section 148 has been introduced w.e.f. 01.09.2018 and amendment shall have retrospective effect and shall be applicable to all the pending cases even wherein the complaints were filed prior to 01.09.2018 – Petition dismissed. Surinder Singh Deswal’s case 2020(1) RCR (Criminal) 604 = (2019) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 10018 = 2019 (1) L.A.R. 21 relied.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 08.09.2021

Revisional jurisdiction – Condition of pre-deposit of fine/ compensation – High Court ordered unless the fine amount is deposited, the petitioner is not entitled to press into service the hearing the petition filed u/s 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C – Held, depositing of fine amount could not have been made a condition precedent for the purpose of hearing of the revision petition – Impugned order set aside.

(SC) Decided on: 04.08.2021

Suspension of sentence in appeal – Condition of deposit of 20% of compensation amount – Non-deposit of -- Direction given that in case the respondents do not deposit the amount in question, then necessary steps warranted under law be taken thereupon and the Appellate Court shall proceed to dispose off the main appeal itself at the earliest.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 26.03.2021

Compounding of offence without consent of complainant -- Cheque amount as well as charges deposited by convict/ accused -- Offence is permitted to be compounded.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 20.12.2019

Cheque bounce case -- Revisional Jurisdiction of High court -- It is well settled that in exercise of revisional jurisdiction, the High Court does not, in the absence of perversity, upset concurrent factual findings -- It is not for the Revisional Court to re-analyse and re-interpret the evidence on record.

(SC) Decided on: 06.02.2019

Compromise of offence – Setting aside of conviction and sentence -- As per settlement, the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs. 4 lacs against the disputed amount as full and final settlement -- When the parties have amicably settled their dispute, the conviction and sentence of the accused, u/s 138 of the N.I. Act, can be set aside -- Judgment of conviction and order of sentence as well as judgment passed by the lower appellate Court, are set aside.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 28.09.2018

Considering the fact that the parties have amicably settled their dispute before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre and no other litigation is pending between them, the permission granted to compound the offence under the provisions of Section 147 of the N.I. Act -- Judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court, as well as judgment passed by the lower appellate Court, are set aside.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 16.08.2018

Compromise of the matter – Sentence already undergone -- Taking into consideration the argument raised for the petitioners to the effect that he is not seeking acquittal, rather, since petitioner has undergone more than half of his sentence and a compromise has also been entered between the parties, Court feels that the ends of justice would be met, if the substantive sentence awarded is reduced to the period already undergone by him.

(P&H HC) Decided on : 27.09.2017

Moral turpitude – Dismissal from service -- Dispute was of private nature -- Offence at best, though has a criminal colour to it cannot be held to be an offence involving moral turpitude – Dismissal from service simplicitor on the ground of conviction u/s 138 of the Act without holding a regular inquiry, as envisaged under the Rules, is not sustainable and deserves to be set aside -- Removal from service is set aside -- Petitioner would be deemed to be in service with all consequential benefits.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 08.05.2017

Admission of liability in court – Challenge to finding on merit – Held, once the statement was made by the accused petitioner before the lower Appellate Court, acknowledging the due payments towards him, thereafter, he cannot be allowed to breath hot and cold in the same breadth to allege that the judgment of the lower Appellate Court is illegal.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 06.04.2017

Concurrent running of sentence -- Discretion to make the sentences to run concurrently can be exercised by the trial Court or by the lower Appellate Court or by the revisional Court at the time of exercising revisional jurisdiction -- It will not be open for a person to seek such discretion by moving an application under Sections 427 and 482 Cr.P.C.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 06.04.2017

Concurrent sentences -- There are numerous complaints of different complainants in respect of different cheques issued from different accounts of different Banks -- Though the complaints were decided by the same Court vide judgment and order of the even date, but the same cannot be treated to be of single transaction -- Involvement in numerous complaints is indicative of the fact the he is habitual offender – Held, petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of running of sentences concurrently in terms of Section 427 Cr.P.C.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 06.04.2017

Compounding of offence – Amount of Rs.30,000/- paid to complainant in revision – Conviction order set aside and petitioner ordered to be released on deposit of 15% amount i.e. Rs.4500/- in Haryana State Legal Services Authority.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 23.02.2017

Compounding of offence – Offence under Section 138 of NI Act is compoundable -- This offence, as per the statutory provision of law contained in NI Act itself, is compoundable at every stage of litigation -- Once the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and the complainant has received the agreed amount, conviction and sentence of the petitioner cannot be sustained any further – Amicable settlement arrived between the parties -- Petitioner is acquitted of the charges framed against him.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 09.12.2015

Sentence reduced to 6 months – Cheque for Rs. 1,47,100/- -- Petitioner/accused is facing the agony of trial, appeal and the present criminal revision petition for more than 13 years -- Petitioner is a labourer and for personal necessity, he had obtained the amount from the respondent, which he could not pay; the petitioner is neither required nor involved in any other case and, as such, a first offender; the petitioner remained on bail during the pendency of the trial, appeal and the present criminal revision petition, but he did not misuse the concession of bail; the petitioner had already suffered incarceration for 5 months and 8 days – Substantive sentence reduced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 02.12.2015

Moral Turpitude – Termination of service -- Conviction u/s 138 of N.I. Act even though have a criminal colour cannot be termed to be such as the genesis of the dispute essentially arising from a civil transaction which should not, therefore, ordinarily have any bearing on the service of an employee -- Punishment order of termination of services of the petitioner is extremely harsh – Termination order set aside.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 05.11.2015

Double jeopardy – Trial and punishment under Section 420 IPC – Permissibility of – Section 300(1) of Cr.P.C. is wider than Article 20(2) of the Constitution -- While, Article 20(2) of the Constitution only states that 'no one can be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once' -- Section 300(1) of Cr.P.C. states that no one can be tried and convicted for the same offence or even for a different offence but on the same facts – Held in the case although the offences are different but the facts are the same -- Hence, Section 300(1) of Cr.P.C. applies -- Consequently, the prosecution u/s 420, IPC was barred by Section 300(1) of Cr.P.C.

(SC) Decided on: 01.02.2011