Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2017 DAILYLAW 3059 (PNJ)

AVTAR SINGH v. GURNAM SINGH & ANR

CRR/1524/2017 · 2026-03-25

Mandeep Pannu

body2017

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-30633-202 CRR-1524-2017 101+331 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Avtar Singh Gurnam Singh and Another CORAM : HON'BLE MS Present: Mr. P.S.Jammu Mr. Gaurav, Advocate for Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG, Punjab MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. The petitioner has filed the instant the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, been convicted and sentenced years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/ imprisonment of 20 days Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 12.04.2017, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, appeal of the petitioner against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.09.2016 2024 in/and 2017 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM CRR Date of Decision : VERSUS and Another HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Mr. P.S.Jammu, Advocate and Mr. Gaurav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, for r Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG, Punjab -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral) The petitioner has filed the instant the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous s and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment of 20 days for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act') as also the judgment dated , passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, appeal of the petitioner against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of 19.09.2016 has been dismissed. -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-30633-2024 in/and CRR-1524-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision : 25.03.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondents MANDEEP PANNU the petitioner. respondent No.1 Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG, Punjab. The petitioner has filed the instant revision petition for setting aside the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.09.2016 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kapurthala whereby he has rigorous imprisonment for a period of 0 and in default of fine to further undergo simple for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the 'the Act') as also the judgment dated , passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, vide which the appeal of the petitioner against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of setting aside 19.09.2016, whereby he has imprisonment for a period of 02 and in default of fine to further undergo simple for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the 'the Act') as also the judgment dated , vide which the appeal of the petitioner against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.25 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-30633-202 CRR-1524-2017 2. The brief facts of the case are that allegedly taken a loan of Rs.4 lac from the complainant for his domestic needs and in order to discharge his legal liability, the same allege no.085952 dated 15.05.2013 amounting to Rs.4 lac in favor of the complainant, drawn at Capital Local Area Bank Ltd., Jalandhar Road, Kapurthala. On presentation of the aforesaid cheque for encashment, the same was returned as dishonored with memo dated 18.05.2013 with t Thereafter, the complainant also sent a legal notice dated 23.05.2013 despite which, the accused failed to make the payment. Hence, on the basis of what had allegedly transpired above, the complainant has been constrained to complaint. 3. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 0 of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment of 20 days punishable under Section 138 of the Act Class, Kapurthala petitioner has filed the appeal, which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, revision petition has been filed. 4. The petitioner has also filed an application i.e. CRM under Section 147 of the Act permission from this Court charges under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. 2024 in/and 2017 (O&M) The brief facts of the case are that the complainant is that accused had allegedly taken a loan of Rs.4 lac from the complainant for his domestic needs and in order to discharge his legal liability, the same allege d 15.05.2013 amounting to Rs.4 lac in favor of the complainant, drawn at Capital Local Area Bank Ltd., Jalandhar Road, Kapurthala. On presentation of the aforesaid cheque for encashment, the same was returned as dishonored with memo dated 18.05.2013 with t Thereafter, the complainant also sent a legal notice dated 23.05.2013 despite which, the accused failed to make the payment. Hence, on the basis of what had allegedly transpired above, the complainant has been constrained to The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 02 years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/ of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment of 20 days under Section 138 of the Act by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Kapurthala, vide order dated 19.09.2016 petitioner has filed the appeal, which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, vide order dated revision petition has been filed. The petitioner has also filed an application i.e. CRM under Section 147 of the Act read with Section 528 of BNSS/482 Cr.P.C permission from this Court to compound the offence and to acquit charges under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. -2- the complainant is that accused had allegedly taken a loan of Rs.4 lac from the complainant for his domestic needs and in order to discharge his legal liability, the same allegedly issued a cheque bearing d 15.05.2013 amounting to Rs.4 lac in favor of the complainant, drawn at Capital Local Area Bank Ltd., Jalandhar Road, Kapurthala. On presentation of the aforesaid cheque for encashment, the same was returned as dishonored with memo dated 18.05.2013 with the reason "Funds Insufficient". Thereafter, the complainant also sent a legal notice dated 23.05.2013 despite which, the accused failed to make the payment. Hence, on the basis of what had allegedly transpired above, the complainant has been constrained to file the The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous 2 years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment of 20 days for the offence by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist 19.09.2016. Feeling aggrieved, the present petitioner has filed the appeal, which was dismissed by the learned Additional ide order dated 12.04.2017. Hence the present The petitioner has also filed an application i.e. CRM-30633-202 read with Section 528 of BNSS/482 Cr.P.C, seeking to compound the offence and to acquit him of the charges under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. the complainant is that accused had allegedly taken a loan of Rs.4 lac from the complainant for his domestic needs and dly issued a cheque bearing d 15.05.2013 amounting to Rs.4 lac in favor of the complainant, drawn at Capital Local Area Bank Ltd., Jalandhar Road, Kapurthala. On presentation of the aforesaid cheque for encashment, the same was returned as he reason "Funds Insufficient". Thereafter, the complainant also sent a legal notice dated 23.05.2013 despite which, the accused failed to make the payment. Hence, on the basis of what had file the rigorous and in default for the offence by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist . Feeling aggrieved, the present petitioner has filed the appeal, which was dismissed by the learned Additional . Hence the present 2024 , seeking of the TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.25 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-30633-202 CRR-1524-2017 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner averred that the present revision the Mediation No.1 has filed h paid an amount of Rs. further submits that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is essentially a civil wrong given the colour of cr dispute has been amicably settled and the complainant has received a substantial amount in full and final settlement, the very foundation of the complaint ceases to exist. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that both the a passed by the Courts below be set aside and the petitioner be acquitted of the charge(s) levelled against her. 6. Lea matter has been compromised placed on recor the complainant allowed. 7. On complaint case and he is not aware of any compromise effected between the parties. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment in the case of ‘Tilak Kataria vs. State of Haryana and 404, wherein, after considering various judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court, it 2024 in/and 2017 (O&M) Learned counsel for the petitioner averred that the present revision petition, both the parties have Centre of this Court and in th his affidavit. Learned counsel paid an amount of Rs.3,75,000/- as full and final settlement of the dispute. He further submits that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is essentially a civil wrong given the colour of cr dispute has been amicably settled and the complainant has received a substantial amount in full and final settlement, the very foundation of the complaint ceases to exist. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that both the a passed by the Courts below be set aside and the petitioner be acquitted of the charge(s) levelled against her. arned counsel for respondent No.1 matter has been compromised before the Mediat rd his affidavit to that effect. Le complainant/respondent No.1 has no objection, if the present application is n the other hand, learned Stat complaint case and he is not aware of any compromise effected between the Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment in the case Tilak Kataria vs. State of Haryana and another’, 2021 (3) RCR (Criminal) , wherein, after considering various judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court, it -3- Learned counsel for the petitioner averred that during the pendency of have compromised the matter bef his regard complainant-respond further submits that the petitioner as full and final settlement of the dispute. He further submits that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is essentially a civil wrong given the colour of criminal offence and once the dispute has been amicably settled and the complainant has received a substantial amount in full and final settlement, the very foundation of the complaint ceases to exist. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that both the aforesaid judgments passed by the Courts below be set aside and the petitioner be acquitted of the respondent No.1 – complainant submits that the tion Centre of this Court and he earned counsel further submits t has no objection, if the present application is te counsel submits that this is a complaint case and he is not aware of any compromise effected between the Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment in the case another’, 2021 (3) RCR (Criminal) , wherein, after considering various judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court, it during the pendency of fore dent the petitioner as full and final settlement of the dispute. He further submits that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments iminal offence and once the dispute has been amicably settled and the complainant has received a substantial amount in full and final settlement, the very foundation of the complaint ceases to foresaid judgments passed by the Courts below be set aside and the petitioner be acquitted of the ts that the has that has no objection, if the present application is submits that this is a complaint case and he is not aware of any compromise effected between the Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment in the case another’, 2021 (3) RCR (Criminal) , wherein, after considering various judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court, it TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.25 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-30633-202 CRR-1524-2017 has been held that when the complainant does not have any objection, the proceedings should come to an end. 9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hyath (D) by Lrs’ 2017 (2) RCR (Criminal) 453 that once the settlement between the parties has been arrived at, the conviction can also be set aside and the litigation too. Similar view has be Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of and another, 2021(4) RCR (Criminal) 86 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.2, are ad-idem of this Court and the petition may be allowed and permission may be granted to the parties to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Act in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Babalal H, 2010 (2) RCR (Criminal) S.Borcar, 2025 INSC 1158 learned trial Court and the learned Appellate Court may be set aside and the petitioner be acquitted of the charge(s). 11. I have heard learned 12. A p matter was sent chances of the c the Mediator ha dispute amicably 2024 in/and 2017 (O&M) has been held that when the complainant does not have any objection, the proceedings should come to an end. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘A.T. Sivaperumal vs. Mohammed Hyath (D) by Lrs’ 2017 (2) RCR (Criminal) 453 that once the settlement between the parties has been arrived at, the conviction can also be set aside and the litigation too. Similar view has be Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of and another, 2021(4) RCR (Criminal) 86. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent idem that the matter stands compromise and the petition may be allowed and permission may be granted to the parties to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Act in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Babalal H, 2010 (2) RCR (Criminal) 851 and S.Borcar, 2025 INSC 1158, the impugned judgments and order passed by the learned trial Court and the learned Appellate Court may be set aside and the petitioner be acquitted of the charge(s). I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. perusal of the case file reveals th t to Mediation and Concilation C compromise amongst the parties as been received to the effect y. -4- has been held that when the complainant does not have any objection, the A.T. Sivaperumal vs. Mohammed Hyath (D) by Lrs’ 2017 (2) RCR (Criminal) 453, decided on 27.03.2017, has held that once the settlement between the parties has been arrived at, the conviction can also be set aside and the litigation too. Similar view has been taken by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Jagmohan Vs. Sandeep Aggarwal Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent that the matter stands compromised before the Mediation Cen and the petition may be allowed and permission may be granted to the parties to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Act in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed and Sanjabij Tari versus Kishore the impugned judgments and order passed by the learned trial Court and the learned Appellate Court may be set aside and the counsel for the parties and perused the record. hat vide order dated 02.08.2024, Centre of this Court to explore s. In pursuance thereof, a report that the parties have settled th has been held that when the complainant does not have any objection, the A.T. Sivaperumal vs. Mohammed , decided on 27.03.2017, has held that once the settlement between the parties has been arrived at, the conviction can en taken by a Jagmohan Vs. Sandeep Aggarwal Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent ntre and the petition may be allowed and permission may be granted to the parties to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Act in view of the law Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Sanjabij Tari versus Kishore the impugned judgments and order passed by the learned trial Court and the learned Appellate Court may be set aside and the the the t of heir TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.25 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-30633-202 CRR-1524-2017 13. In the present case, the cheque(s) amount is Rs. the law laid down in offence can be allowed, provided the petitioner amount by way of costs. On calculation, 7.5% of the cheque amount comes to be Rs.30,000/-. As noticed above, the parties have settled the dispute by way of compromise. CRM compound the offence punishable under section 138 of the Act 14. In view of the above, the impugned judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence dated Magistrate Ist Class, learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Section 138 of the Act stands dismissed and the petitioner stands acquitted of the charge(s), subject to her depositing the costs of Rs. Legal Services Authority, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sanjabij Tari’s case (supra) certified copy of this order. 15. The present 16. Registry is directed to ensure the compliance of this order as to depositing of costs by the petitioner. 17. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. March 24, 2026 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable 2024 in/and 2017 (O&M) In the present case, the cheque(s) amount is Rs. the law laid down in Sanjabij Tari’s case (supra) offence can be allowed, provided the petitioner amount by way of costs. On calculation, 7.5% of the cheque amount comes to be . As noticed above, the parties have settled the dispute by way of CRM-30633-2024 is allowed and compound the offence punishable under section 138 of the Act In view of the above, the impugned judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence dated 19.09.2016 Magistrate Ist Class, Kapurthala and the judgment learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, are set aside Section 138 of the Act stands dismissed and the petitioner stands acquitted of the charge(s), subject to her depositing the costs of Rs. Legal Services Authority, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Sanjabij Tari’s case (supra), within 15 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The present revision petition is allowed in the aforementioned terms. Registry is directed to ensure the compliance of this order as to depositing of costs by the petitioner. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -5- In the present case, the cheque(s) amount is Rs.4,00,000/-. In view of Sanjabij Tari’s case (supra), compounding of the present offence can be allowed, provided the petitioner-accused pays 7.5% of the cheque amount by way of costs. On calculation, 7.5% of the cheque amount comes to be . As noticed above, the parties have settled the dispute by way of is allowed and this Court grants permission to compound the offence punishable under section 138 of the Act In view of the above, the impugned judgment of conviction and order passed by the learned Judicial and the judgment dated 12.04.2017 passed by , are set aside. The complaint under Section 138 of the Act stands dismissed and the petitioner stands acquitted of the charge(s), subject to her depositing the costs of Rs.30,000/- with the Punjab State Legal Services Authority, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme , within 15 days from the date of receipt of the allowed in the aforementioned terms. Registry is directed to ensure the compliance of this order as to All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE : Speaking : Yes/No . In view of , compounding of the present ed pays 7.5% of the cheque amount by way of costs. On calculation, 7.5% of the cheque amount comes to be . As noticed above, the parties have settled the dispute by way of this Court grants permission to In view of the above, the impugned judgment of conviction and order passed by the learned Judicial passed by he complaint under Section 138 of the Act stands dismissed and the petitioner stands acquitted of the with the Punjab State Legal Services Authority, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme , within 15 days from the date of receipt of the allowed in the aforementioned terms. Registry is directed to ensure the compliance of this order as to All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.25 20:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document