EMIL B. K. Vs. SUNIL LAWRENCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused for offence punishable under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in S.T. No. 10/2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court - I, Aluva, instituted on the basis of the complaint filed by the 1st respondent herein. There are two dishonoured cheques involved in this case, each of Rs.15 lakhs said to be issued on 18/01/2011 and 03/01/2011 respectively, thus totalling to Rs.30 lakhs. Anx.1 is the copy of the impugned complaint, which has led to the institution of S.T. No. 10/2013 on the file of the abovesaid Trial Court. The prayer in this petition is for quashment of the impugned Anx.A1 complaint and all consequential proceedings in S.T. No. 10/2013.

(2.) Heard Sri. C. R. Syamkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner (accused), Sri. Rajiv Nambisan, learned counsel appearing for R - 1 (complainant) and Sri. Justin Mathew, learned Prosecutor appearing for R - 2 State.

(3.) It is common ground that the 1st respondent (complainant) herein had filed Civil Suit as O.S. No. 249/2011 before the Sub Court, North Paravur, in which, the petitioner herein (accused) is the defendant therein, seeking recovery of the monies covered by the very same dishonoured cheques involved in this case totalling to Rs.30 lakhs. On the request of both sides, both parties were referred for attempting settlement through the Lok Adalat, constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act. Anx.II is the copy of the plaint in O.S. No. 245/2011 and in Anx.III is the award dated 17/12/2012 rendered by the Lok Adalat, which recorded settlement between the parties in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The Lok Adalat has recorded the said compromise and has also directed refund of the entire court fee to the plaintiff as can be seen from a mere reading of Anx.III award dated 17/12/2012. As per Anx.III order, the petitioner has agreed to pay a total amount of Rs.31.95 lakhs to the complainant herein along with 8% interest thereon within a period of 3 months. It is not in dispute that the petitioner did not pay the abovesaid amount in terms of the award of the Lok Adalat and so the 1st respondent (complainant) was constrained to initiate execution proceedings before the Civil Court concerned for execution of Anx.III Lok Adalat award passed by the Civil Court. Accordingly, the Sub Court, North Paravur had issued Anx.IV sale notice dated 13/01/2015 in furtherance of the execution of the said award. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that since the matter has already been compromised in the civil suit in terms of Anx. III award, the said award would bind the petitioner even in the present impugned criminal proceedings, which led to the institution of Anx.I complaint and therefore the continuation of the Anx.I criminal proceedings would be nothing short of abuse of the process of the Court and on this limited ground, the petitioner seeks quashment of the criminal complaint.