AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Basant, J.—The petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in a prosecution u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The 1st petitioner/accused No. 1 is a partnership firm and the 2nd petitioner/accused No. 2 is its Managing Partner. The proceedings u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was initiated on the basis of a complaint filed by the complainant/2nd respondent herein.
The trial court found the petitioners guilty. The Sessions Court, in appeal, set aside the conviction. This Court in the appeal against acquittal restored the verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence passed by the trial court. The 1st petitioner has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and the 2nd petitioner has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. He has also been directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs as compensation. Default sentence has also been prescribed.
The petitioners have now come before this Court to apprise this Court of the subsequent settlement and composition of the offence. The 2nd respondent has entered appearance through counsel. He confirms that the disputes have been settled and that the 2nd respondent/complainant has compounded the offence alleged against the petitioners. The entire amount due to the 2nd respondent has already been received, it is submitted.
An application has been filed by the rival contestants duly countersigned by their respective counsel to confirm that there has been some settlement/composition.
The appellate judgment rendered by this Court restoring the verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence has now become final. The learned Counsel, in these circumstances, prays that the dictum in Sabu George v. Home Secretary 2007 (1) KLT 982 may be invoked and the 2nd petitioner may be saved of the trauma of incarceration in prison notwithstanding the composition.
Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the dictum in Sabu George v. Home Secretary 2007 (1) KLT 982 can be invoked in favour of the 2nd petitioner to save him from the trauma of incarceration in prison notwithstanding the composition. I am further satisfied that the direction for payment of compensation need not be enforced, the 2nd respondent having admitted that the entire amount has been paid and received in full satisfaction of his claim. I am not satisfied that the sentence imposed against the 1st petitioner/ accused No. 1 deserves to be interfered with notwithstanding the composition. I am satisfied that the sentence imposed against the 2nd petitioner/accused No. 2 alone need be set aside invoking the powers u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. as explained in the dictum in Sabu George v. Home Secretary 2007 (1) KLT 982.
This Crl.M.C. is accordingly allowed in part. The sentence imposed on the 2nd petitioner u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act including the direction for payment of compensation and the default sentence is hereby quashed.
Hand over a copy of this order to the learned Counsel for the petitioner.