Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Lalita Kamal Vyas, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated 7th March 2018 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai in C.C. No. 1176/SS/2017 and the order dated 19th January 2019 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 630 of 2018 by the Sessions Court, Mumbai. The dispute pertained to a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 filed by respondent No. 2, Dhanjibhai S. Donda, against the petitioner. During the pendency of the petition, the parties arrived at a settlement. The petitioner's counsel tendered a memorandum of understanding/consent terms dated 1st October 2019, which was taken on record. Respondent No. 2 filed an affidavit stating that the entire dispute was resolved and he had no grievance against the petitioner. Respondent No. 2 was personally present in court and confirmed the settlement. The court, considering the settlement and the affidavit, allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders and the criminal proceedings. The court also directed that the amount deposited by the petitioner in the trial court be paid to respondent No. 2.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Negotiable Instruments Act - Section 138 - Compounding of Offence - Settlement between parties - The petitioner and respondent No. 2 (complainant) entered into a settlement and filed consent terms. The complainant filed an affidavit stating no grievance against the petitioner. The court, taking into consideration the settlement and the complainant's presence, allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings. Held that upon settlement, the proceedings under Section 138 can be quashed. (Paras 3-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 can be quashed upon settlement between the complainant and the accused.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 7th March 2018 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai in C.C. No. 1176/SS/2017 and the order dated 19th January 2019 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 630 of 2018 by the Sessions Court, Mumbai are set aside. The criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 1176/SS/2017 are quashed. The amount deposited by the petitioner in the trial court shall be paid to respondent No. 2. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Settlement between parties
- compounding of offence under Section 138 NI Act
- quashing of criminal proceedings upon settlement
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (10) 81
Criminal Writ Petition No. 831 of 2019
Mr. Kapil P. Dave for Petitioner, Mr. Rajender Singh Saluja for Respondent No. 2, Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for Respondent – State
The State of Maharashtra and Dhanjibhai S. Donda
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging orders passed by Metropolitan Magistrate and Sessions Court in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought setting aside of the order dated 7th March 2018 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai in C.C. No. 1176/SS/2017 and the order dated 19th January 2019 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 630 of 2018 by the Sessions Court, Mumbai.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was aggrieved by the orders passed in the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Previous Decisions
The Metropolitan Magistrate passed an order on 7th March 2018 in C.C. No. 1176/SS/2017, and the Sessions Court passed an order on 19th January 2019 in Criminal Revision Application No. 630 of 2018.
Issues
Whether the criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 should be quashed upon settlement between the parties.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner and respondent No. 2 submitted that the entire dispute is resolved and they have arrived at a settlement. Respondent No. 2 filed an affidavit stating no grievance against the petitioner. Both parties jointly prayed for allowing the petition.
Ratio Decidendi
When the parties to a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 arrive at a settlement and the complainant has no grievance, the criminal proceedings can be quashed by the High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.
Judgment Excerpts
Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner has tendered across the bar memorandum of understanding/consent terms.
Learned counsel appearing for Petitioner and Respondent No. 2 submit that, the entire dispute is resolved, and the Petitioner and Respondent No. 2 have arrived at a settlement and Respondent No. 2 has no grievance against the Petitioner.
Respondent No. 2 is personally present in the Court. On a query, he states that, he has no grievance against the Petitioner.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 831 of 2019 before the Bombay High Court challenging the order dated 7th March 2018 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai in C.C. No. 1176/SS/2017 and the order dated 19th January 2019 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 630 of 2018 by the Sessions Court, Mumbai. During the pendency of the petition, the parties settled the dispute and filed consent terms and an affidavit. The court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings.
Acts & Sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138
