Crl. Revision No. 1196 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 1196 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 27, 2010 Suman Kumar Bansal and another ........Petitioners Versus M/s Hygienic Foods Roller Flour Mills (P) Ltd. through its Manager Sh. J.S. Guleria and another .......Respondents ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Lalit K. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. V.K. Jindal, Advocate for the respondents. SABINA, J. The petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'the Act') by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Panchkula vide judgment dated 6.8.2009. Vide order of the even date, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- under Section 138 of the Act. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula and the same was dismissed vide order dated 24.4.2010. Hence, the present revision petition. The prosecution story in brief as noticed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in paras 2 and 3 of the impugned judgment reads as under :- “ The facts in brief are that the complainant i.e. respondent for the purpose of appeal was running a flour Crl. Revision No. 1196 of 2010 (O&M) 2 mill in the name of M/s Hygienic Foods Roller Flour Mills (P) Ltd. and the present complaint has been filed by the Managing Director Sh. Madan Gopal Goyal who has authorised Sh. J.S.Guleria, Manager of the Mill to file the same. On demand raised by the accused (appellant), the respondent company supplied 200 bags weighing 35 Kgs each flour, whole meal weighing 7000 Kgs @ Rs.273.50 paise Per bag amounting to Rs.54,700/- and 150 bags of flour weighing 39 Kgs each i.e. weighing 5850 Kgs @ Rs.350/- per bag, thus valuing Rs.45,750/- i.e. total bill of Rs.1,00,450/- vide invoice no.1209 dated 13.08.2003 and also another truck of flour whole meal containing 200 bags of 39 Kgs, each weighting 7800/- Kg @ Rs.305/- per bag totalling Rs.61,000/- vide invoice no.1333 dt. 20.09.2003. In discharge of his liability the appellant had issued two cheques bearing no.985934 dt. 23.09.2003 for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and another cheque bearing no. 985935 dt. 26.09.2003 for a sum of Rs.50,450/- drawn on Punjab & Sind Bank 26, Chandigarh. The respondent company presented the said cheques in its account for encashment through its banker, IDBI Bank Ltd., Sector 11, Panchkula but the same was dishonoured for “Insufficient Funds” in the account of the appellant. The respondent company tried to approach the appellant but he kept on putting of the mater on one pretext or the other and thereafter the respondent company issued a Crl. Revision No. 1196 of 2010 (O&M) 3 legal notice dt. 19.2.2004 u/s 138 of the Act. The same was received back unserved by the sender an d hence it was deemed to have been served. The appellant despite service of notice did not make the payment of the outstanding amount within the stipulated period. It was alleged by the respondent company that the appellant had issued cheques with malafide intention and hence action be taken against him as per the provisions of the Section 138 of the Act.” During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the Act, but has submitted that the sentence qua imprisonment be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioners has handed over a sum of Rupees one lac to counsel for respondent No.1, who is in turn handed over the said amount to Mr. Madan Gopal Goyal, Managing Director of M/s Hygienic Foods Roller Flour Mills (P) Ltd. towards compensation. On the last date a pay order of the cheque amount in question has already been handed over by the petitioners to the counsel for the respondents. Since the cheque amount in question has already been paid to the respondent No.1 alongwith compensation amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/-, the learned counsel for respondent No.1 has not opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners to the effect that the sentence qua imprisonment be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner and the compensation be reduced to Rs.1,00,000/-. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the Act is maintained. However, the sentence qua imprisonment of the Crl. Revision No. 1196 of 2010 (O&M) 4 petitioner is reduced to already undergone by him. Fine as imposed by the trial Court has already been deposited by the petitioners. The compensation awarded by the trial court is reduced from Rs. 2,00,900/- to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the said amount has already been paid by the petitioners to the counsel for respondent No.1 today in the Court. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. (SABINA) May 27, 2010 JUDGE Anand