IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2009 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1931 CRL.A.No. 1390 of 2007() --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN CRL.L.P.477/2007 Dated 18/07/2007 ST.703/2006 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-VIII, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ........................................................................ APPELLANT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- ALEYAMMA THOMAS, MANGATTUMALAYIL HOUSE, SHARON GARDENS KOTTAMUGHAL, NALANCHIRA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND ACCUSED: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. M/S.FOCUS I.T., REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, P.O. BOX NO.5710, HOTEL SILVER SAND ROOM NO.112, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. GOPAKUMAR B.NAIR, PROPRIETOR, DO, DO. BY ADVS. SRI.D.KISHORE FOR R2 & R3 SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (FOR R1). THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. --------------------------- CRL.A.No.1390 OF 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ This is an appeal preferred against the order of acquittal passed by Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - VIII, Trivandrum, in S.T.703/06. It was a case u/s.138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and there were two other similar cases between the complainant and the accused. The interesting point that had arisen for consideration is whether the First Class Magistrate was correct in acquitting the accused on the ground that the offence is compounded. This case along with other cases was referred to the Adalath and the Adalath on its sitting on 9.12.2006 passed an order as follows :- “ The above three cases are connected on the file of JFCM Court-VIII, Thiruvananthapuram. Both sides present. Case settled for Rs.2 lakhs each in S.Ts.555/06, 703/06 and 712/06 respectively (ie., total amount of Rs.6 lakhs). The accused will pay Rs.1 lakh each on 11.12.2006, 11.01.2007, 11.02.2007, 11.03.2007, 11.04.2007 and 11.05.2007 respectively. In default the complainant can proceed against the CRL.A.No.1390 OF 2007 2 accused for the entire amount. Case ordered accordingly.” With this award the matter came up for consideration before JFCM-VIII, Trivandrum. The learned Magistrate by his Order dated 4.1.2007, disposed of the case as follows. “ The complainant submitted that the case is settled. I have gone through the order of the Adalath. It is seen that the case settled, hence the accused is acquitted, as the offence is compounded.” Though there are undertakings, there has not been total compliance and ultimately the complainant has come up before this court with a leave petition to appeal against the order acquittal which had been allowed. Appeal is also admitted. 2. The Legal Service Authorities Act 1987 and the provisions therein are to be given a very wide interpretation, for the reason that the very object of the enactment is to permit the parties to settle the cases and curtail the long delay in disposal of cases. All the three cases involved, offences punishable u/s.138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and by virtue of the amendment in Negotiable Instrument Act, CRL.A.No.1390 OF 2007 3 they have become compoundable. Since the Lok Adalath has not passed an award acquitting the accused, necessarily one has to find out what is the legal effect of that award. It has to be stated, when the parties with both their eyes open enter into a settlement and that the understanding between the parties was to the effect that an amount of Rs.6 lakhs due will be paid back in 6 monthly equal instalments. The purport of the award is to the effect that a decree is granted in favour of the complainant for realisation of the amount. It is made crystal clear that in default, the complainant can proceed against the accused for the entire amount. It is clear that the complainant had been given an order for realisation of the amount in the event of default. The parties have settled the matter and in the light of the settlement order has been passed to pay Rs.6 lakhs in 6 monthly instalments, on failure of which the complainant can proceed against the accused. This amounts to an award for realisation of the amount which is enforceable by virtue of the provisions of Legal Services Authorities Act. When such a CRL.A.No.1390 OF 2007 4 compromise is arrived and it is given effect to by an award it amounts to compounding of the offence and therefore there is nothing wrong in the order of acquittal passed by the Magistrate. To give effect to the award and avoid further litigation I direct the second respondent herein, to pay the balance of Rs.3 lakhs in 5 monthly equal instalments commencing from 1.8.09. If there is a failure of payment of 2 consecutive instalments, the instalment facility will stand cancelled and the complainant can enforce the award by execution as envisaged under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. 3. Since the compromise of the matter had resulted in passing of the award which is executable, it amounts to compounding of the offence and therefore the order of acquittal is not interfered with. Matter disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE ami.