BOMBAY MINERAL LTD Vs. MEENA AGENCY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant-original complainant has preferred this Appeal for enhancement of the punishment awarded to the respondents-original accused by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court, Mumbai by order dated 19th March 2008 in case No.256/SS of 2007. By the said judgment and order the learned Magistrate convicted the Respondents-accused under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced them to pay fine of Rs.1000/- each in default S.I. for one week. THE Respondents-accused were also directed to pay Rs.15,00,000/-(Rupees fifteen lakhs only) to the complainant as compensation under section 357(3) of Cr.P.C.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellant. I have perused the Judgment and Order and the evidence which has been annexed by the Appellant.

(3.) THE accused have shown their willingness to pay the cheque amount when they first appeared in court. It is seen that the accused were ready to plead guilty and ready to pay the cheque amount as well as interest. I have noticed that though the accused were ready to pay, the complainant wants to see that the accused are punished and sent to jail. THE learned counsel for the Appellant has pointed out the provisions of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act wherein it is provided that the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to years. On perusal of the section it is seen that the sentence of imprisonment is not mandatory and there is an option in the section which says that the offence may be punishable with imprisonment or with fine. Thus, it is not mandatory that sentence of imprisonment has to be imposed.