IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. R. No. 2155 of 2005(O&M) Date of decision: 29.6.2010 M/s Shivalik Promoters and Developers,Mohali, Tehsil Kharar, Distt. Ropar and another … Petitioners versus Gurnam Singh and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. Vivek Goel, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Vinish Singla, Advocate, for the respondents. … ARVIND KUMAR, J: The present petitioner No.2, Sat Parkash Sharma,partner of petitioner No.1-firm, namely, M/s Shivalik Promoters and Developers, was tried by the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rajpura, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the allegation that the complainants had entered into an agreement with the present petitioners in regard to sale of their land measuring 59 kanals 19 marlas situated at village Mor Thikri, Tehsil Rajpura, at the rate of Rs.25 lakhs per acre. A sum of Rs.20 lakhs was agreed to be paid as earnest money, out of which the accused-petitioners paid only a sum of Rs.50,000/- in cash and for payment of Rs.19.5 lakhs, petitioner No.2, S.P.Sharma, through petitioner No.1-firm, issued four cheques, i.e. 3 cheques for Rs.5 lakhs each and 4th cheque for Rs.4.50 lakhs. However, the said cheques on presentation by the complainants with the banker, were returned unpaid with the remarks “insufficient funds” and despite notices, they did not care to make payment of the amount of cheques, which necessitated them to file the present complaint. On conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Court vide judgment and order dated 22.12.2004 held petitioner, Sat Parkash Sharma guilty under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.3000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous Crl. R. No. 2155 of 2005(O&M) -2- imprisonment for three months. Appeal filed by the accused-petitioner came to be dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, vide judgment dated 18.11.2005. Hence, the present revision. During the pendency of the revision petition, an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved stating that the matter has been compromised with complainants and there remains no dispute between the parties. The compromise has been placed on record and so as the joint affidavit of Jagminder Singh(GPA of Gurnam Singh), Baldev Singh, Jarnail Singh and Gurvinder Singh (stated to be the only legal representative of late Hardev Singh, complainant) to support the compromise. In this regard, complainant Gurvinder Singh has made a statement before this Court today that the matter has been settled by them with the petitioners and that the offence may be compounded. Heard. As per provisions of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, offence under Section 138 is compoundable. Compounding of the offence under Section 138 of the Act can be done during trial of the case as well as by the High Court or by the court of Sessions. Sub-section (8) of Section 320 Cr.P.C. expressly enacts that where the composition of an offence under this section is recorded by the Court, it shall have effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded. In view of the above, where the parties have settled the matter, it is a fit case for allowing them to compound the offence. Reference can be made to judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sayeed Ishaque Memon v. Ansari Naseer Ahmed and another, 2006(2) RCR(Criminal) 331 and K. Gyansagar v. Ganesh Gupta and another, 2006(2) RCR (Criminal) 677. Resultantly, the revision petition is allowed, conviction and sentence imposed upon the petitioner No.2-Sat Parkash Sharma, partner of petitioner No.1-firm, for the afore-stated offence is set aside and he is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the basis of compromise. June 29, 2010 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE