BETCO CHIT FUND Vs. VEEKAY INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT was a complaint under Section 138/ 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed by M/s Betco Chit Fund private Limited through its attorney Shri R. L. Sehgal against M/s Vee kay Industries and in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, faridabad. Complainant M/s Betco Chit Fund Private Limited was represented by Sh. V. K. Sharma, Advocate while accused M/s Vee Kay industries was represented by Sh. S. K. Daggar, Advocate. In appeal before the learned Session Judge M/s Vee Kay Industries, appellant-accused was represented by Sh. S. K. Daggar Advocate while m/s Betco Chit Fund Private Limited, complainant-respondent was represented by Sh. V. K. Sharma, Advocate. It was a private prosecution launched bya private complainant viz M/s Betco Chit Fund Private limited. Offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not a cognizable offence. The Police has no right to intervene so far as this offence is concerned. If that was so, before the learned Sessions judge, impleading of State of Haryana and appearance of Sh. P. C. Mehta, public Prosecutor was rather a misnomer. Section 142 of the Negotiable instruments Act itself is clear when it lays down that "notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 no Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 138 except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, as the case may, the holder in due course of the cheque. "

(2.) IT was a private prosecution launched at the instance of a private party namely M/s Betco Chit Fund Private Limited and therefore the State was not entitled to be reimbursed for any litigation expense. Learned Sessions Judge while maintaining the conviction ordered the release of R. C. Kapoor, Proprietor of M/s Vee Kay industries under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. While releasing him on probation of food conduct, learned Sessions judge should either have directed the payment to be made to the complainant as compensation and he should have ordered the conversion of the amount of fine into amount of compensation or he should have set aside that part of the order passed by the learned magistrate whereby she had burdened him with Rs. 5000/- as fine, in addition to sentencing him to six months imprisonment. Rs. 5000/- imposed as fine by the learned Sessions Judge, shall be paid to the complainant-petitioner M/s Betco Chit Fund Private Limited as compensation.

(3.) THIS revision is accordingly disposed. Revision Disposed of.