Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Lalita Kamal Vyas, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated 6th September 2017 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri, Mumbai in C.C. No. 4160/SS/2017 and the order dated 19th January 2019 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 1102 of 2018 by the Sessions Court, Mumbai. The dispute pertained to a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. During the proceedings, the parties informed the court that they had resolved the entire dispute amicably. The petitioner's counsel tendered a memorandum of understanding/consent terms dated 1st October 2019, which was taken on record. The counsel for Respondent No. 2 also tendered an affidavit of Respondent No. 2 stating that he had no grievance against the petitioner. Both counsel jointly prayed that the petition be allowed and disposed of in light of the settlement. The court, considering the settlement and the affidavit, allowed the petition, set aside the impugned orders, and disposed of the petition. Rule was made absolute.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Negotiable Instruments Act - Section 138 - Compounding of Offence - Settlement between parties - Petitioner and Respondent No.2 arrived at a settlement and filed consent terms and affidavit - Respondent No.2 had no grievance against Petitioner - Court allowed the petition and set aside the impugned orders, quashing the proceedings - Held that upon settlement, the proceedings can be quashed (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 can be quashed upon settlement between the parties.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order dated 6th September 2017 passed in C.C. No. 4160/SS/2017 by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri, Mumbai and the order dated 19th January 2019 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 1102 of 2018 by the Hon’ble Sessions Court at Mumbai. Rule made absolute.
Law Points
- Settlement of dispute under Section 138 NI Act
- compounding of offence
- quashing of criminal proceedings upon settlement
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (10) 88
Criminal Writ Petition No. 838 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, Himmatbhai M. Viradiya
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal Writ Petition challenging orders in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought setting aside of the order dated 6th September 2017 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri, Mumbai in C.C. No. 4160/SS/2017 and the order dated 19th January 2019 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 1102 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 6th September 2017 in C.C. No. 4160/SS/2017, and the Sessions Court passed an order on 19th January 2019 in Criminal Revision Application No. 1102 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
Learned counsel for Petitioner and Respondent No. 2 submitted that the entire dispute is resolved, and Respondent No. 2 has no grievance against the Petitioner. They jointly prayed that taking into consideration the affidavit filed by Respondent No. 2 and the memorandum of understanding/consent terms dated 01.10.2019, the petition may be allowed and disposed of.
Ratio Decidendi
When the parties have settled the dispute and the complainant has no grievance, criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 can be quashed.
Judgment Excerpts
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.
The impugned order dated 6th September 2017 passed in C.C. No. 4160/SS/2017 by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri, Mumbai and the order dated 19th January 2019 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 1102 of 2018 by the Hon’ble Sessions Court at Mumbai, be set aside.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court challenging the order dated 6th September 2017 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri, Mumbai in C.C. No. 4160/SS/2017 and the order dated 19th January 2019 passed in Criminal Revision Application No. 1102 of 2018 by the Sessions Court, Mumbai. During the hearing, the parties informed the court about the settlement and filed consent terms and an affidavit. The court allowed the petition and set aside the impugned orders.
Acts & Sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138
