TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, in a cheque dishonour conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the revisional court could accept the compromise between the parties, impose costs, and reduce the sentence to the period already undergone.
Analysis: The parties placed a compromise deed before the Court and the complainant acknowledged receipt of the settled amount. The revision was at the stage where compounding was sought after conviction and appeal, so the settled principle governing delayed compounding was applied. The Court treated the compromise as genuine, found no impediment to acting upon it, and followed the graded-cost approach for belated settlement in cheque dishonour matters. In view of the stage of the proceeding and the compromise, a cost of 2% of the cheque amount was directed to be deposited with the State Legal Services Authority before release.
Conclusion: The compromise was accepted, the sentence was modified to the period already undergone, and the applicant was directed to be released on deposit of the ordered costs.
Final Conclusion: The revision resulted in modification of the custodial sentence on settlement terms, with the compromise given effect subject to payment of costs.
Ratio Decidendi: In a cheque dishonour case, a genuine compromise at the revisional stage can be given effect by reducing the sentence to the period already undergone and imposing costs for belated settlement.
TaxTMI 
