IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr.Revision No. 112 of 2011 Date of Decision 19th July ,2011 ________________________________________________________ State Bank of Patiala ….Petitioner. Versus Ajay Kumar Arora ….Respondent. ________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 ___________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. G.C. Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pawan Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Taranjeet Singh Bhogal, Advocate. __________________________________________________________________ Dev Darshan Sud, J (oral) The petitioner is the complainant before the learned trial Court. The respondent was convicted for offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. ` 24,000/- represented the amount of the dishonoured cheque. On conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Magistrate directed the respondent herein to pay a sum of ` 24,000/- as amount of the dishonoured cheque and ` 10,000/- on account of loss suffered 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 by the complainant. In addition, he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. 2. The respondent appealed and the learned Appellate Court while upholding the judgment of the learned trial Court held that since the petitioner was unwilling to compromise the case, the sentence of imprisonment was set aside and only ordered to pay ` 500/- as fine. 3. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and gone through the judgments of two Courts below. 4. In every case of dishonour of a Negotiable Instrument negotiated settlement would be best way for avoiding clogging the docket of the Court. However, because of relacitrant/speculative attitude and litigious nature of the litigants, they pursue the matter upto the High Court in revision or under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, instead of settling the matter amicably. However, taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the compensation as imposed by the trial Court is restored with this exception that sentence of imprisonment shall not be imposed upon the respondent in case he deposits this amount within a period of one month from today before the learned trial Court. On such deposit being made, this amount shall be paid/disbursed to the petitioner herein. In case of non-deposit of the amount, the sentence of imprisonment shall revive. Petition stands disposed of.Dasti copy on usual terms. July 19th, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud), ms Judge 3