SABU GEORGE Vs. HOME SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can composition of an offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act even after the conviction and sentence have become final after the judgments of the trial, appellate and revisional courts be accepted

(2.) These questions of importance arise for consideration in these petitions. As the questions raised were reckoned by me as important and vital, I had sought the assistance, which I get in good measure too, of Shri.S.Sreekumar, Standing Counsel for the C.B.I. and Shri.T.G. Rajendran, Advocate. All counsel have been heard in detail.

(3.) To the vital facts first. Crl.M.C. 259 of 2007 and Crl.M.A. 8626 of 2006 in Crl.R.P.No. 7 of 2004 are both filed by some accused in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence on him have become final and the said petitioner now faces a sentence of S.I. for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,60,000/- and in default to undergo S.I. for a period of four months. If the fine is realised, an amount of Rs.1,58,000/- has been directed to be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C. Crl.M.A. 8626 of 2006 was filed initially by the petitioner with a prayer that the joint application for composition filed by the petitioner/accused and the respondent/complainant duly counter signed by their respective counsel may be accepted. It was later, by way of abundant caution, that Crl.M.C. 259 of 2007 was also filed by the petitioner/accused with a prayer that the sentence imposed on him may not be enforced in view of the subsequent composition, by invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.