Compounding of cheque dishonour cases requires complainant consent; proceedings may still be ended under Article 142 in fit cases.

Compounding of a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act offence requires the complainant's consent, and Section 482 CrPC cannot be used to bypass that requirement; the High Court's compounding order was therefore unsustainable. However, because the cheque amount and additional sums had already been deposited and no useful purpose would be served by reviving the prosecution, the Supreme Court terminated the complaint and further proceedings in exercise of Article 142 to do complete justice, while permitting withdrawal of the deposited amount by the complainant.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could be compounded under Section 147 of that Act by invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 without the complainant's consent. (ii) Whether, in the facts of the case, the complaint and further proceedings could be quashed despite the complainant's consent after deposit of the cheque amount and additional sums.

Issue (i): Whether an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could be compounded under Section 147 of that Act by invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 without the complainant's consent.

Analysis: Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 preserves the High Court's inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice, whereas Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 specifically declares offences under that Act compoundable. The decision distinguishes the two powers and holds that compounding under Section 147 is not an exercise that can be undertaken in disregard of the complainant's consent. The Court relied on the settled position that compounding is different from quashing and reiterated that the consent of the complainant remains essential for compounding an offence under Section 138.

Conclusion: The offence could not be compounded under Sections 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 without the complainant's consent.

Issue (ii): Whether, in the facts of the case, the complaint and further proceedings could be quashed despite the complainant's consent after deposit of the cheque amount and additional sums.

Analysis: Although the compounding order was unsustainable for want of consent, the Court noted that the accused had already deposited the cheque amount with interest and the additional amount ordered by the High Court, and that the matter was otherwise fit for closure. Since restoring the proceedings would serve no useful purpose, the Court invoked Article 142 of the Constitution of India to do complete justice between the parties and brought the criminal proceedings to an end while permitting withdrawal of the deposited amount by the complainant.

Conclusion: The complaint and all further proceedings were quashed in exercise of Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

Final Conclusion: The High Court's compounding order was set aside for want of complainant consent, but the criminal complaint itself was ultimately terminated by the Supreme Court in exercise of its plenary power to do complete justice.

Ratio Decidendi: Compounding of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 requires the complainant's consent, and the High Court cannot use its inherent power to bypass that requirement, though the Supreme Court may still quash proceedings under Article 142 in an appropriate case.

---