MANNA LAL Vs. PARAS STEEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of above referred cases as the parties involved in them are the same and similar question of facts are involved in them. The revision petitions have been preferred by petitioner-Manna Lal against his conviction and awarding of compensation to the complainant by the learned Appellate Court whereas the appeals have been preferred by appellant-complainant-Ramesh Kumar for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Appellate Court.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner-accused argued that the petitioner was convicted in Cases CIS No.NACT 349/2013, NACT 349/2013, 351/2013, 355/2013, 350/2013, 348/2013 under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the NI Act') and was sentenced by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Amloh to one year of rigorous imprisonment. The petitioner duly filed an appeal challenging the conviction/judgment dtd. 7/8/2015, and notably, no appeal was preferred by the complainant against the said judgment.

(3.) Per contra, the learned counsel for the complainant contended that Sec. 138 of the NI Act is a victim-centric legislation aimed at compensating the victim by remedying the financial injury caused. It was submitted that the petitioner had been sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment in five separate complaints filed by the complainant, with the Trial Court directing the sentences to run consecutively. However, during the petitioner's appeal, the Appellate Court modified this, ordering the sentences to run concurrently. Along with this favourable modification, the Appellate Court also directed the petitioner to pay compensation to the complainant.