N.Mohanan & ANR.  INSC 693 (6 April 2009)
JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 679 OF 2009 ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE
PETITION (CRL) NO._2593 OF 2009 (CRL.M.P. NO. 5493 OF 2009) RAJENDRAN ...
APPELLANT VERSUS ORDER Delay condoned.
This appeal is
directed against final order dated 26th May, 2008 passed by a learned Judge of
the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Criminal Revision Petition No. 1609 of
By the impugned
order, the learned Judge, while upholding the conviction of the appellant for
an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
(for short "the Act"), has modified the sentence awarded to the
appellant and he has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.2.00 lakhs as
compensation under Section 357(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The appellant has
been permitted either to deposit the said fine amount before the trial Court or
pay directly the compensation amount to the respondent/complainant within six
months of the date of the order. It has been further directed that if the
appellant fails to deposit or pay the said amount within the time granted, he
shall suffer simple imprisonment for three months by way of default sentence.
Learned counsel for
the parties submit that during the pendency of this appeal, the parties have
entered into a compromise and in terms of the said compromise, entire amount
has been received by the respondent. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent No.1/complainant affirms the stand taken by learned counsel for the
appellant and states that the respondent has no claim against the appellant.
Learned counsel pray that in view of the said compromise, the offence under
Section 138 of the Act may be compounded and the conviction of the appellant be
Having regard to the
statement made by the learned counsel for both the parties, we are of the view
that there is no reason not to accept the compromise entered into between the
parties. The offence under Section 138 of the Act being compoundable, we allow
the prayer made on behalf of the contesting parties and dispose of the appeal
on the basis of the said settlement.
appeal is allowed by holding that since the matter has been compromised between
the parties and the amount in terms of the said compromise is said to have been
paid towards full and final settlement of complainant's demand, the appellant
is entitled to acquittal.
The order of
conviction and sentence recorded by the Courts below is set aside and the
appellant is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Act.
It appears from the
surrender certificate filed on behalf of the appellant that the appellant is
lodged in Sub Jail, Peermade, Idukki District, Kerala State since 19th March,
2009 as convict No. 918. If that be so, the appellant shall be released
appeal stands disposed of in the above terms.
Pages: 1 2