DHIRAJ SINGH AND ORS. Vs. SURITI ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An interesting question that consequent upon a compromise arrived at between the complainant and the accused-respondent in the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, hereinafter referred to as "the Act" in short, the accused-petitioners should be permitted to compound the offence, without imposing costs in accordance with the graded scheme framed by a larger Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babala, 2010 5 SCC 663, or in the alternative the complaint should be quashed while exercising inherent jurisdiction by the High Court, under Section 482 Cr. P.C., has been brought to this Court for adjudication in these petitions.

(2.) Since the question hereinabove brought to this Court for adjudication is common in these petitions, therefore, I propose to dispose of the same by a common judgment. 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment'.Yes

(3.) Since the point involved in these petitions is legal in nature, therefore, there is no need to give every factual detail and suffice would it to say that the parties, who are common in these appeals, had some business transaction between them. The petitioners, hereinafter referred to as "the accused persons", owed some liability towards the respondent, hereinafter referred to as "the complainant". The accused petitioners, in order to discharge such liability, they owed towards the complainant, issued following cheques on different dates: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_55_LAWS(HPH)9_2013_1.html</FRM>