- (1.) This is a revision petition against the judgement of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.02.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dasuya, convicting and sentencing the petitioner for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, to undergo sentence for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months as well as the judgement dated 02.12.2011 passed by the Appellate Court, dismissing the appeal.
(2.) During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is ready and willing to make the payment towards the dishonoured cheque along with interest in easy instalments to the complainant. Accordingly, notice of motion was issued to the respondent/complainant. Learned counsel appearing for complainant stated that if the petitioner makes the payment of the dishonoured cheque along with interest, the respondent/complainant has no objection in case the petitioner is acquitted of the charge. It was further stated by the learned counsel for the respondent that the complainant/respondent has no objection if the said amount is paid in 12 monthly equal instalments along with interest at the rate of 7% per annum. The brother of the petitioner to show their bona fide has handed over Rs.10,000/- to the learned counsel for the complainant which has been duly accepted.
(3.) Learned counsel for the parties agree to the following schedule of payment:- 1. Total amount payable with interest Rs.2,43,829.00 @ 7% p.a. (7 years 4 months) 2. Amount paid in advance Rs.10,000/- in Court today (by the brother of the petitioner) 3. Instalment payable in 12 equal Rs.19,4585/- monthly instalments, commencing from March, 7th 2012 up till 07.02.2013 (in 12 monthly instalments) Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Cochin Hotels Co.(P) Ltd. and others v. Kairali Granites and others, 2006 2 RCR(Cri) 333, in some what similar circumstances, allowed the compounding of offence and set aside the order of conviction and sentence. Similar order was also passed by the Apex Court in the case of K Subramanian v. R Rajathi Rep. By POAP Kaliappan, 2010 1 RCR(Cri) 184, in paras 6 and 8 of the judgement, read as under:- "6. Having regard to the salutary provisions of Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this Court is of the opinion that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the petitioner should be permitted to compound the offence committed by him under Section 138 of the Act. 8. The CRL. M.P. No. 12804 of 2009 in which the prayer is made by petitioner to permit him to produce affidavits sworn by him on December 1,2008 as well as affidavit sworn by P Kaliappan power of attorney holder of R. Rajathi on December 1, 2008, as additional documents is allowed. CRL M.P. No. 12803 of 2009 in which the petitioner has prayed to permit him to compound the offence and acquit him by setting aside the conviction recorded in Criminal Case No. 726/2003 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by learned Judicial Magistrate, Karur is allowed. The petitioner is permitted to compound the offence. The order of conviction and sentence recorded by all the Courts are hereby set aside and petitioner is acquitted of the charge levelled against him. All the applications including Review Petition accordingly stands disposed of as also SLP (Crl.) No. 6974 of 2008 @ Crl. M.P. No. 14586 of 2008 in terms of this Order.;