Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2024) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 18944 = 2024(1) L.A.R. 212
[@ SLP [Crl.] No.14824 of 2023]
Decided on: 02.01.2024
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. Nishant Mandal, Adv., Ms. Aakansha Singh, Adv., Ms. Sushama Sharma, Adv., Mr. Praveen Pathak, Adv., Mr. Davinder Pal Kaur, Adv., Mr. Sandeep, Adv., Mr. Sunil Prakash Pandey, Adv., Ms. Sharandha Khandhadia, Adv., Mr. Bharat Singh, Adv., Ms. Preeti Chauhan, Adv., Mr. Chand Qureshi, AOR
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Constitution of India, Article 142 -- Conviction in cheque bounce complaint – Appeal dismissed -- Matter was thereafter settled between the parties -- High Court rejected the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. -- Held, since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and since the original complainant himself is not interested in prosecuting the proceedings, it is a fit case for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to give an end to the litigation between the parties -- Order of sentence and conviction set aside.
(Para 3-8)
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Though the respondent is duly served, none appears for him.
3. It appears that since the matter stands amicably settled between the parties, the respondent is not interested in proceeding further with the present proceedings.
4. The present appellant was convicted for the offence committed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the judgment and order dated 27th March, 2017. The appeal against the said order of conviction was also dismissed.
5. The matter was thereafter settled between the parties. The parties filed an application for compounding of the offence before the Magistrate.
6. The appellant thereafter filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for compounding the offence. The learned Single Judge of the High Court rejected the said application hence the present appeal.
7. Since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and since the original complainant himself is not interested in prosecuting the proceedings, we find it is a fit case for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to give an end to the litigation between the parties.
8. The application for compounding is therefore, allowed. The order of sentence and conviction is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.
Application allowed.
********