Vs. R.Rajathi Tr.Poa  INSC 1698 (5 November 2009)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (CRL)
NO. 355 OF 2009 IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO. 6974 OF 2008 K. Subramanian
....Petitioner(s) Versus R.Rajathi Rep. by P.O.A. P. Kaliappan ...Respondent
By filing this petition, the petitioner has prayed to review and
recall order dated September 11, 2008 passed by this Court dismissing SLP
(Crl.) No.6974 of 2008 @ Crl.M.P. No.14586 of 2008, on the ground that the
amount of Rs.4,52,289/- payable by the petitioner to the original complainant,
i.e. the respondent herein, is already paid pursuant to the compromise between
the parties and the petitioner be permitted to compound the offence. The
petitioner has filed Crl. M.P. No.12801 of 2009, to condone 3 delay of 39 days,
caused in filing review application and Crl. M.P. No.12803 of 2009 to permit
him to compound the offence and acquit him by setting aside the conviction
recorded in Criminal Case No.726 of 2003 by the learned Judicial Magistrate
Karur. The petitioner has filed another Crl.M.P. No.12804 of 2009 with a prayer
to permit him to produce affidavit sworn by him stating that pursuant to
compromise between him and the respondent, he has paid Rs.4,52,289/- to the
respondent as well as affidavit sworn by P.Kaliappan, power of attorney holder
of R.Rajathi stating that pursuant to 4 the compromise, he has received a sum
of Rs.4,52,289/- as additional documents.
This Court has heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and
considered the documents forming part of S.L.P.(Crl) No. 6974 of 2008 and this
From the record, it is evident that the petitioner purchased yarn
from Dharani. A. Traders of R.Rajathi, on credit basis. The petitioner had to
pay a sum of Rs. 4,52,289/- to R.Rajathi. In discharge of his debt, the
petitioner issued three cheques 5 each dated March 7, 2003 for a sum of
Rs.1,51,600/-, Rs.1,17,302/- and Rs.1,83,360/- respectively. The respondent
presented the cheques in bank for realisation on March 7, 2003, but they were
returned unpaid with remark "exceeding of arrangements''.
The respondent after serving statutory notice on the petitioner
filed complaint in the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate, Karur under
Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
The Trial Court by Judgment dated September 21, 2004 convicted the
petitioner under Section 138 and sentenced him to Simple Imprisonment for one
year and fine of Rs.5000/- in default Simple Imprisonment for 3 months. Feeling
aggrieved, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.107 of 2004 before
Sessions Court which was dismissed on 24.12.2004. Thereupon, the petitioner
filed Criminal Revision Application No.179 of 2005 before the Madurai Bench of
Madras High Court 7 which was dismissed on January 30, 2008.
the petitioner filed SLP (Crl) No.6974 of 2008 @ CRL.M.P. No.14586 of 2008
which was also dismissed on September 11, 2008. Thereafter a compromise was
entered into and petitioner claims that he has paid Rs.4,52,289/- to
respondent. In support of this claim, the petitioner has produced affidavit
sworn by him on December 1, 2008. The petitioner has also produced affidavit
sworn by P.Kaliappan, Power of Attorney holder of R.Rajathi 8 on December 1,
2008 mentioning that he has received a sum of Rs.4,52,289/- due under the
dishonoured cheques in full discharge of the value of cheques and he is not
willing to prosecute the petitioner. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner
states at the bar that the petitioner was arrested on July 30, 2008 and has
undergone the sentence imposed on him by the Trial Court and confirmed by
Sessions Court, High Court as well as by this Court. The two affidavits sought
to be produced by 9 petitioner as additional documents would indicate that
indeed a compromise has taken place between petitioner and the respondent and
the respondent has accepted the compromise offered by petitioner pursuant to
which he has received a sum of Rs.4,52,289/-. In the affidavit filed by the
respondent a prayer is made to permit the petitioner to compound the offence
and close the proceedings.
Having regard to the salutary provisions of Section 147 of
Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 320 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, this Court is of the opinion that in view of the compromise arrived
at between the parties, the petitioner should be permitted to compound the
offence committed by him under Section 138 of the Code.
For the foregoing reasons CRL.M.P. No.12801 of 2009 in which
prayer to condone the delay of 39 days caused in filing review application is
allowed and 1 delay is condoned. The Review Petition succeeds.
dated September 11, 2008 dismissing SLP (Crl) No.6974 of 2008 @ CRL.M.P.
No.14586 of 2008 is recalled. The said SLP is restored on file with its
The CRL.M.P. No.12804 of 2009 in which the prayer is made by
petitioner to permit him to produce affidavits sworn by him on December 1, 2008
as well as affidavit sworn by P. Kaliappan power of attorney holder of R.
Rajathi on December 1, 2008, 1 as additional documents is allowed. CRL. M.P. No.12803
of 2009 in which the petitioner has prayed to permit him to compound the
offence and acquit him by setting aside the conviction recorded in Criminal
case No. 726/2003 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by
Learned Judicial Magistrate, Karur is allowed. The petitioner is permitted to
compound the offence.
of conviction and sentence recorded by all the Courts are hereby set aside and
petitioner is 1 acquitted of the charge leveled against him. All the
applications including Review Petition accordingly stand disposed of as also
SLP (Crl.) No.6974 of 2008 @ CRL.M.P. No.14586 of 2008 in terms of this Order.
.........................................J. (J.M. PANCHAL)
.........................................J. (CYRIAC JOSEPH)
NOVEMBER 5, 2009.