TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 1358
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 41856 of 2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana whereby the petitioner was convicted for commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and has been ordered to be sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and half years (18 months) along with fine of Rs. 4,000/- failing which the petitioner is to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. 3. The Criminal Revision No. 1467 of 2019 titled as "Parmeshwar Kumar Dixit versus State of Punjab and another" has been instituted against the judgment dated 29.05.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 27 dated 11.03.2015 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana as well as against the judgment dated 26.02.2015 passed in case No. 43710 of 2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana whereby the petitioner was convicted for commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and has been ordered to be sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and half years (18 months) along with fine of Rs. 4,000/- failing which the petitioner is to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. 4. Whilst Criminal Revi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of accused company M/s Desire Clothing. The respondent-complainant company being a public limited company and engaged in supply of yarn to respondent-accused on credit basis, had been receiving part payment in lieu of supply so made. After adjusting all the payments received from the petitioner-accused, an amount of Rs.31,54,434.95 was found due as on 20.03.2010. Various cheques were issued by the petitioner-accused in discharge of the said preexisting liability. The two of the cheques are subject matter of the instant revision petitions. That the said cheques were presented for encashment in Bank, the same were dishonoured by the bank on the remarks "insufficient funds" vide Bank Memo dated 23.03.2010. A legal notice dated 16.04.2010 was accordingly served on the petitioner-accused and on failure on the part of the petitioner-accused to make the payment, the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was thus instituted. "5. During the course of post summoning evidence complainant Ram Parkash stepped into the witness box as CW1 and tendered his affidavit Ex.CA in his examination in chief and he deposed as narrated in the complaint and also place....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2009 for Rs. 10,00,000/- as Ex.DW3/D.DW4 Mahesh Kaura Postal Assistant Focal Point, Post Office, Ludhiana . He brought the Certified copy of list of period of preservation record, detail of record weided out old record , detail of amount deposited in the department after weided out the record , original certificates dated 3.5.2011 and 10.5.2011 and proved the same Ex.DW4/A to Ex.DW4/F and accused himself examined as DW5 and tendered into evidence documents Ex.DW2 to Ex.DW8 and thereafter closed the defence evidence." 11. Upon consideration of the said evidence led by the respective parties, the Judicial Magistrate First Class convicted the petitioner-accused for commission of offence under Section 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and half year (18 months) along with fine of Rs. 4,000/- failing which the petitioner is to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Aggrieved thereof, an appeal was preferred before the Sessions Court, Ludhiana, however, vide the impugned judgment dated 29.05.2019, the Criminal Appeal so preferred was also dismissed by the Additional Sessions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... understand the scope of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 7. Mr. Rohtagi submitted that the said position had been accepted by this Court in various decisions, such as in the case of O.P. Dholakia vs. State of Haryana & Anr. [(2000) 1 SCC 762], wherein it was held that since the petitioner had already entered into a compromise with the complainant and the complainant had appeared through counsel and stated that the entire money had been received by him and he had no objection if the conviction already recorded under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is set aside, the Hon'ble Judges thought it appropriate to grant permission, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, to compound the offence. While doing so, this Court also indicated that necessarily the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Act stood annulled. 8. The said view has been consistently followed in the case of (1) Anil Kumar Haritwal & Anr. vs. Alka Gupta & Anr. [(2004) 4 SCC 366]; (2) B.C. Seshadri vs. B.N. Suryanarayana Rao [2004 (11) SCC 510] decided by a three Judge Bench; (3) G. Sivarajan vs. Little Flower Kuries & Enterprises Ltd. & Anr. [(2004) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing under Section 147 of the aforesaid Act. 12. Apart from the above, this Court is further empowered under Article 142 of the Constitution to pass appropriate orders in line with Sub-Section (8) of Section 320 Cr.P.C. in an application under Section 147 of the aforesaid Act, in order to do justice to the parties. 13. As far as the non-obstante clause included in Section 147 of the 1881 Act is concerned, the 1881 Act being a special statute, the provisions of Section 147 will have an overriding effect over the provisions of the Code relating to compounding of offences. The various decisions cited by Mr. Rohtagi on this issue does not add to the above position. 14. It is true that the application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was made by the parties after the proceedings had been concluded before the Appellate Forum. However, Section 147 of the aforesaid Act does not bar the parties from compounding an offence under Section 138 even at the appellate stage of the proceedings. Accordingly, we find no reason to reject the application under Section 147 of the aforesaid Act even in a proceeding under Article 136 of the Constitutio....