TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal Allowed: Conviction u/s 138 of NIA Overturned, Offence Compounded, Appellant Acquitted.</h1> <h3>SUNIL Versus KUNDA SUNIL UIKEY</h3> The SC allowed the appeal against the conviction under Section 138 of the NIA, 1881, and acquitted the appellant. The Court acknowledged the willingness ... Dishonour of Cheque - compounding of sentences - HELD THAT:- There is doubt that the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NIA, 1881 is compoundable. In the said circumstances, the parties are desirous to compound the sentence - there are no reason for not to compound the sentence of the appellant and acquit the appellant. The appeal is allowed and appellant is acquitted - The respondent shall furnish his details of the bank account to the Registry of this Court. Issues involved: Appeal against conviction u/s 138 of NIA, 1881, compoundability of the offence, acquittal and transfer of amount.Summary:Appeal against Conviction u/s 138 of NIA, 1881:The appellant appealed against the order convicting them under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur confirmed the conviction. The appellant was sentenced to pay compensation and undergo imprisonment. The Supreme Court heard both counsels and noted that the appellant had deposited the required amount in a fixed deposit as directed by the Court. The fixed deposit was set to mature on a specific date.Compoundability of the Offence:The respondent expressed willingness to compound the matter by withdrawing the amount upon maturity of the fixed deposit. The parties mutually desired to compound the sentence. Considering the compoundability of the offence u/s 138 of NIA, 1881, the Court found no reason not to compound the sentence. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order, acquitted the appellant, and instructed the respondent to provide bank account details for transferring the amount along with accrued interest.Acquittal and Transfer of Amount:The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, acquitted the appellant, and directed the Registry to transfer the amount in the appellant's bank account upon maturity of the fixed deposit. Pending applications were disposed of accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
