A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 and 147—Compounding of Offence After Conviction—Held: An offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be compounded at any stage of the proceedings, including after conviction by the trial court and affirmation thereof in appeal—Where the parties have amicably settled the dispute and the complainant has received the entire cheque amount or compensation agreed upon, the Court may exercise its power under Section 147 to compound the offence, set aside the judgments of conviction and sentence, and acquit the accused. (Paras 5–9). B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 147—Compromise Between Parties—Litigation Costs and Compounding Fee—Held: While permitting compounding of an offence under Section 138 of the Act on...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Statutory Notice—Limitation—Cause of Action—Held: Service of a demand notice within the prescribed period from the date of receipt of information regarding dishonour of the cheque is a mandatory condition precedent for prosecution under Section 138—Where the complainant's own evidence established that the cheque was dishonoured and the return memo was received on 03.01.2018, but the statutory notice was issued only on 27.03.2018, beyond the prescribed period, no valid cause of action arose under Section 138—Acquittal of the accused was therefore justified. (Paras 12–18). B. Criminal Appeal Against Acquittal—Scope of Interference—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Held: An appellate court should not inter...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 118(a), 138 and 139—Presumption of Legally Enforceable Debt—Rebuttal of Presumption—Held: Once the accused admits issuance of the cheque and his signatures thereon, statutory presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 arise that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability—The burden then shifts upon the accused to rebut such presumption by raising a probable defence through cogent evidence—A mere plea that the cheque was issued as a blank security cheque, unsupported by reliable evidence, is insufficient to rebut the statutory presumption—Conviction under Section 138 was rightly upheld where the accused failed to establish repayment of the loan or otherwise dislodge the presumption. (Paras 18&ndash...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 118, 139—Presumption—Rebuttal—Held: Once issuance of cheque and signature thereon are admitted or proved, statutory presumption arises that cheque was issued towards discharge of legally enforceable debt—Burden shifts on accused to rebut presumption on preponderance of probabilities—Failure to lead evidence or raise probable defence results in conviction. (Paras 6–8, 12) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—“Security cheque”—Liability—Held: Dishonour of cheque issued as “security” also attracts offence under Section 138, if it relates to a subsisting liability and becomes enforceable on default—There is no statutory exemption for security cheques under the Act. (Paras 10–11) ...

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Conviction—Compromise between parties—Setting aside of conviction—Held: Petitioner convicted and sentenced under S. 138 NI Act and appeal dismissed—Subsequently, parties entered into compromise and complainant received entire compensation and expressed no desire to pursue proceedings—In view of settlement, judgment of conviction and sentence set aside—Petitioner acquitted subject to condition of depositing 10% of cheque amount with H.P. Legal Services Authority within stipulated time—Failure to comply to render order ineffective and petitioner liable to undergo sentence—Revision allowed and petitioner directed to be released forthwith unless required in any other case. (Paras 5 to 11) ...

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 and 147—Dishonour of cheque—Conviction—Compounding of offence—Litigation cost and compounding fee—Held: Accused convicted under S. 138 NI Act for dishonour of cheque—During pendency of proceedings, entire compensation paid and complainant expressed no objection—Offence permitted to be compounded under S. 147 even after conviction in view of principles laid down in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H.—Impugned judgments of conviction and sentence set aside and accused acquitted—Accused directed to pay Rs 5,000 as litigation cost to complainant and Rs 5,000 as compounding fee to Himachal Pradesh State Legal Services Authority within stipulated time. (Paras 7 and 8) ...

A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138, 118 and 139—Dishonour of cheque (“payment stopped by drawer”)—Presumption—Rebuttal—Held: Once issuance of cheque is admitted, statutory presumption arises that it was issued in discharge of legally enforceable debt or liability—Accused must rebut presumption by leading cogent evidence—Mere denial in statement under Section 313 CrPC insufficient—Where accused admitted issuance, dishonour and receipt of notice, and failed to rebut presumption, offence under S. 138 made out and conviction justified. (Paras 19, 20, 23, 26, 27, 33 to 35) B. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Compensation—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 313—Quantum and principles—Held: Admission in statement under S...

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 and 147—Dishonour of cheque—Conviction—Compromise during revision—Compounding of offence—Held: Petitioner convicted by Trial Court and conviction affirmed in appeal for offence under S. 138 NI Act—During pendency of criminal revision, parties entered into compromise and complainant agreed to accept deposited amount and raised no objection—In exercise of power under S. 147, offence can be compounded even after conviction in view of law laid down in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H.—Accordingly, conviction and sentence set aside and petitioner acquitted—Accused directed to deposit Rs 5,000 as compounding fee with H.P. State Legal Services Authority, failing which liable for penal consequences including contempt. (Paras 5 to 9) ...

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138 and 147—Compounding of offence—Conviction set aside on compromise—Held: Accused convicted under S. 138 NI Act by Trial Court and conviction upheld in appeal—During pendency of revision, parties entered into compromise and amount paid by accused under One Time Settlement Scheme—Complainant-Bank expressed no objection to compounding—In exercise of power under S. 147 NI Act and in terms of Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., offence can be compounded even after conviction—Accordingly, judgments of conviction and sentence set aside and accused acquitted—Accused directed to pay litigation cost of Rs 5,000 to complainant and Rs 5,000 as compounding fee to State Legal Services Authority within stipulated time. (Paras 5 to 10) ...

A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482 and Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005—Sections 20(6) and 31—Quashing of proceedings—Compromise—FIR alleging domestic violence and harassment—Parties entered into amicable settlement—Held, where offences are personal in nature and do not involve serious or heinous crimes, High Court may exercise inherent powers to quash proceedings—Continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of process. [Paras 6, 8, 11] B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482—Quashing on basis of compromise—Guidelines—Principles laid down in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab reiterated—Power to quash to be exercised sparingly and with caution—Permissible in cases having predominantly civil or matrimonial flavour&m...