2014 (8) TMI 1245

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly) was issued by the Respondent to the Appellant. The cheque is dated 11/04/2003. When it was presented for encashment on the same day, it bounced. The Appellant filed complaint on 27/05/2003. The trial was conducted by the Judicial Magistrate No. V, Coimbatore. Learned Magistrate by order dated 05/09/2005 convicted the Respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ("the NI Act") and sentenced him to undergo six months imprisonment and also to pay fine of ` 4,000/-, in default, to undergo three months further imprisonment. Being aggrieved by this judgment, the Respondent preferred an appeal in the Court of Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Coimbatore. The learned Additional District Judge confirmed the con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of 2003, on the file of Judicial Magistrate No. V, Coimbatore, before being remanded into the Judicial Custody then the accused will be set at liberty and the sentence by two months simple imprisonment would not be operated against the accused. If the accused remits the said compensation and it is open to the complainant to withdraw the said amount from the Trial Court along with a copy of this order. If the accused pays the said compensation amount, the fine amount shall be returned to him." 2. We have heard learned Counsel for the Appellant at some length. Though notice is served on the Respondent, he is not appearing either in person or through a lawyer. This Court, therefore, appointed Mrs. Nanita Sharma as amicus curiae. We have hea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the sentence for the offence under Section 138 should be of such a nature as to give proper effect to the object of the legislation. No drawer of the cheque can be allowed to take dishonour of the cheque issued by him light heartedly. The very object of enactment of provisions like 138 of the Act would stand defeated if the sentence is of the nature passed by the trial Magistrate. It is a different matter if the accused paid the amount at least during the pendency of the case." 5. Again, in R. Vijayan v. Baby and Anr. 2011 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 743 : 2011 (4) R.C.R. (Civil) 834 : 2011 (6) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 19 : (2012) 1 SCC 260 this Court considered the same question. This Court also examined the need to award compensatio....