Amit Jyoti And ANR v. Ashwani Chadha And ANR

CRR-1731 of 2015 (O&M)



   
  CRR1731 of 2015 (O&M) Date of Decision:12.5.2015 Amit Jyoti and another #.Petitioners

Versus

Ashwani Chadha and another #.Respondents     




Present:

Mr. Akshay Kumar Jindal, Advocate for the petitioners. Respondent No.1 in person.



 1.

It is submitted that compromise has been effected between the parties concerned and respondent No.1, who was the complainant, agreed to receive a sum of Rs.10,18,000/ under the settlement. The complainant Ashwani Chadha submits that he has received demand draft No.600101 drawn on Punjab National Bank, Model Town, Ambala City in full and final settlement. He has no objection if the petitioner is acquitted. 2.

Counsel for the petitioner relied on Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) SCC 663 where the Supreme Court laid down certain guidelines to impose costs in case of compounding of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act at different stages. The Supreme Court mentioned in the said case that if a request was made before the court of Sessions or in the High Court in revision or appeal, compounding may be allowed. 15% of the cheque amount may be imposed as costs. The amount received by the complainant is stated to be inclusive of costs.

3.

The compromise between the parties is, therefore, accepted. ISHWAR SINGH GARHWAL 2015.05.12 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRR-1731 of 2015 (O&M) 4.

The appeal is allowed and the petitioner is acquitted.   

             12.5.2015 ishwar     ISHWAR SINGH GARHWAL 2015.05.12 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document