Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2002 (10) TMI 809

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ial First Class Magistrate, North Parur in C.C. 559/96. By the said judgment the learned Magistrate had found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. He was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year. 2. The complainant alleged that the revision petitioner/accused had issued Ext. P2 cheque to her for an amount of Rs. Three lakhs. The accused is the brother-in-law of the complainant. When the matrimonial life ran into rough weather, because of differences of opinion between the spouses, an agreement (Ext. P1) was executed between the concerned parties. At the time of settlement of the disputes Ext. P2 cheque for Rs. Three lakhs was allegedly issued ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o the conclusion that the cheque was issued for the due discharge of a legally enforceable debt/liability. 2) The sentence imposed is at any rate excessive. 6. The signature in the cheque is admitted. Ext. P1 agreement is also admitted. As per Ext. P1 agreement Ext. P2 cheque had been issued on 13.2.1996 to discharge a liability. Documentary evidence clearly shows that Ext. P2 cheque was issued by the accused for the due discharge of a legally enforceable debt/liability. There is no merit in the contention, even if true, that the accused had no personal liability to the complainant. The only other contention is that the cheque was issued under threat, coercion and duress. No evidence is there to prove this contention. The conduct of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 9. The counsel for the complainant on the other hand laments that the complainant has been left high and dry without any-effective redressal of his genuine grievance. No direction for payment of compensation under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been issued it is complained. 10. Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act reflects the anxiety of the Legislature to usher in a new healthy commercial morality among the polity through the instrumentality of the penal law. Here is a classic example where, as part of an attempt to evolve a healthy norm of commercial behaviour, the principle of social engineering through the instrumentality of the penal law is put into operation. What was, prior to the amendment of the Ne....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ircumstances I am of opinion that while it would be proper and apposite to impose a substantive sentence of imprisonment on an offender under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, considerable care must be employed to ensure that the term of imprisonment is not unduly and unnecessarily long. In the facts of the case I am of opinion that imposition of a sentence of imprisonment for one year is unnecessary. 11. I do further note that the courts below have not alertly perceived the plight of the complainant. Inspite of several binding precedents like Hari Kishan and State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh and Ors. (AIR 1988 SC2127) it is unfortunate that courts are not perceiving the necessity to compensate the victim. The plight of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 14. The contention that Section 357(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code permits payment of "compensation" only and that the amount due under the cheque cannot be reckoned as compensation for the purpose of Section 357(3) does not also appeal to me at all. According to me the expression "compensation" is used under Section 357(3) not in any technical sense, and must certainly include payment due to the victim under the cheque in respect of which the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is committed. It is unnecessary, considering the purpose which Section 357(3) has to serve, to import any special or technical meaning to the expression "compensation" used there. 15. The fact that powers under Section 138 are misused ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rts alone can perhaps ensure the interests of justice. 17. I am in these circumstances of the opinion that normally in a successful prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act a direction under Section 357 must follow. If there are sufficient and compelling reasons, the court must specify such reasons in the judgment and then only choose not to invoke the powers under Section 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code. All subordinate courts shall zealously ensure compliance with the above direction. 18. In the facts and circumstances of this case I am satisfied that imposition of a sentence of simple imprisonment for one month coupled with a direction under Section 357(3) of the Code to pay an amount of Rs. 3,10,000 as co....