2021 (8) TMI 720 - HC - Indian Laws

Court Upholds Non-Bailable Warrants in Section 138 Case

The court upheld the order issuing non-bailable warrants against the applicants for failing to appear despite summonses in a case under Section 138 of the ... Quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Maintainability of successive applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Non-bailable warrants and process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. - Compoundability of offence under Section 138 N.I. Act - Settlement pursuant to Damodar S. Prabhu principleMaintainability of successive applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Whether the present (third) application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging proceedings in Complaint Case No.2261 of 2017 is maintainable and liable to be entertained. - HELD THAT: - The Court recorded that the applicants had earlier filed two criminal miscellaneous applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; the first (Cr. M.A. No.24041 of 2019) challenging the summoning order and the entire proceedings was dismissed on 01.07.2019 on merits, and the second (Cr. M.A. No.7786 of 2020) was dismissed on 25.02.2020 as not maintainable. There being no change in circumstances and no challenge having been made to subsequent orders of issuance of non-bailable warrants or to the later process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C., the Court found no ground to entertain a further 482 petition. The reasoning notes that prima facie offences were made out earlier and that no infirmity in the impugned order of 08/11.01.2021 was demonstrated by the applicants. In those circumstances the present application was held to lack merit.Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed as not maintainable and devoid of merit.Compoundability of offence under Section 138 N.I. Act - Settlement pursuant to Damodar S. Prabhu principle - Whether the applicants may still settle the dispute or make payment despite dismissal of the present 482 application. - HELD THAT: - The Court observed that proceedings under Section 138 N.I. Act are compoundable at any stage and noted counsel's statement that the applicants were ready to settle. The Court referred to the law governing settlement (Damodar S. Prabhu) and recorded that the applicants remain free to settle the matter and deposit the amount payable before the court below at any stage; this observation formed part of the Court's disposal while refusing to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction to quash the proceedings.Applicants are at liberty to settle the dispute and deposit the amount before the trial court; dismissal of the 482 petition does not preclude a lawful settlement or payment.Final Conclusion: The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as successive and lacking merit; no infirmity was shown in the impugned order issuing non-bailable warrants and process, and the applicants remain free to settle the Section 138 N.I. Act dispute or deposit the amount before the trial court in accordance with law. Issues:Challenge to order issuing non-bailable warrants and process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. against the applicants.Analysis:The judgment pertains to an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging an order passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar in a complaint case under Section 138 N.I. Act and Sections 420, 120B I.P.C. The applicants had previously filed two similar applications which were dismissed by the High Court. The court noted that the applicants failed to appear before the court despite non-bailable warrants issued against them. The court found no illegality in the impugned proceedings, including the summoning order against the accused-applicants. The court highlighted that the proceedings under Section 138 of N.I. Act are compoundable at any stage, allowing the applicants to settle the dispute by depositing the amount payable under the disputed cheque before the court.The preliminary objection raised by the learned A.G.A. and counsel for the complainant/opposite party-2 regarding the maintainability of the present application was considered by the court. It was pointed out that the applicants had previously approached the court with similar applications which were dismissed. The court emphasized that since there was no change in circumstances, the present application was also deemed not maintainable. The court highlighted the repeated failure of the applicants to appear before the court despite non-bailable warrants issued against them, leading to the issuance of process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. The court found no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the court below, resulting in the dismissal of the present application.In response to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants regarding their willingness to settle the dispute, the court considered the legal aspect of compounding proceedings under Section 138 of N.I. Act at any stage. The court acknowledged the option for the applicants to settle the dispute by depositing the amount payable under the disputed cheque before the court at any stage. However, after hearing the arguments from both parties and examining the facts on record, the court concluded that there were no valid grounds to entertain the present application. Consequently, the court found the application lacking in merit and dismissed it accordingly.