SATYA CHIT FUNDS P LTD Vs. PRAKASH KHATTAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for impugning the common order dated 19. 09. 2006 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate in respect of four complaints filed by the petitioner-complainant under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') against the respondent herein whereby all the four complaints were disposed of as having been compounded. Since the order under challenge is same one in all these petitions and the point involved is also common the same were heard together and now I shall also be disposing of the four petitions by a common order.

(2.) FACTUAL matrix necessary for the disposal of the present petitions is that the petitioner complainant is engaged in the business of Chit Funds. Respondent became member of some Chit Groups and towards discharge of his liability in respect of those Chits he issued several cheques of the total value of Rs. 2,03,500/- in favour of the petitioner but on presentment to his bank all the cheques were dishonoured. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner filed four complaints under Section 138 of the Act. The respondent on being summoned by the trial Court entered appearance and contested the complaints which were in due course clubbed together.

(3.) DURING the pendency of the complaints, the respondent, however, showed his inclination to settle the matter with the petitioner-complainant by moving an application on 25-04-2006. It has been averred in these petitions that the respondent had agreed outside the Court to pay rs. 1,50,000/- towards full and final settlement of the amounts involved in all the four cases and also paid Rs. 60,000/- to the petitioner as part payment and so the case was adjourned to 19-09-2006. However on that date of hearing when complainant intimated the Court about the aforesaid settlement the respondent backed out and claimed that the settlement was for Rs. 1,00,000/- in all and that he was willing to pay the balance amount of Rs. 40,000/ -. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate then directed the complainant to return the amount of Rs. 60,000/- to the respondent which he declined upon which the trial Court passed the impugned common order disposing of the four complaints as having been compounded relying upon a judgment of this Court reported as 2004 (1) JCC (N. I.) 44.