TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (1) TMI 1284
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m of the aforesaid offence but sentenced him only to undergo imprisonment till rising of the court and pay a fine of Rs. 5000 in both cases. Apparently the respondent was happy and, therefore, he did not prefer any appeal. But the complainant/appellant was unhappy and, therefore, he preferred two revisions before the High Court on the premise that the sentence was grossly inadequate. He contended before the High Court that the trial Magistrate should atleast have invoked the provision under Section 357 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code). However the learned single Judge of the High Court of Madras was not inclined to interfere with the sentence passed on the respondent and, therefore, he dismissed both the revisions....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e paid to the complainant." In the said decision this Court reminded all concerned that it is well to remember the emphasis laid on the need for making liberal use of Section 357(3) of the Code. This was observed by reference to a decision of this Court in [1988] 4 SCC 551 Hari Singh v. Sukbir Singh. In the said decision this Court held as follows: "The quantum of compensation may be determined by taking into account the nature of crime, the justness of the claim by the victim and the ability of accused to pay. If there are more than one accused they may be asked to pay in equal terms unless their capacity to pay varies considerably. The payment may also vary depending upon the acts of each accused. Reasonable period for payment of compen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5. It related to a murder case. Apart from the sentence of imprisonment this Court awarded compensation and directed the amount to be collected under Section 431 of the Code. But there is not even a remote hint in the said decision doubting the correctness of the legal proposition adopted in Hari Singh v. Sukhbir Singh. In other words, the said legal position remains in force as no other Bench of this Court has even chosen to depart from it. It is impermissible for the High Court to overrule the decision of the apex Court on the ground that Supreme Court laid down the legal position without considering any other point. It is not only a matter of discipline for the High Courts in India, it is the mandate of the Constitution as provided in A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... adopted by the said judge in Rajendran v. Jose, (2001) 3 Kerala Law Times 431. It is unfortunate that when the Sessions judge has correctly done a course in accordance with the discipline the Single judge of the High Court has incorrectly reversed it. The total amount covered by the cheques involved in the present two cases was Rs. 4,50,000. There is no case for the respondent that the said amount had been paid either during the pendency of the cases before the trial court or revision before the High Court or this Court. If the amounts had been paid to the complainant there perhaps would have been justification for imposing a flee-bite sentence as had been chosen by the trial court. But in a case where the amount covered by the cheque rem....