RAJ REDDY KALLEM    [APPELLANT] Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.   [RESPONDENTS]

(CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2210 OF 2024)

(2JB, A.S. BOPANNA and SUDHANSHU DHULIA JJ.)

Facts: Trial Court vide order dated 01.09.2023 noted the compliance of the order of this Court. In this way, the appellant has by now returned the entire due amount and also paid Rs.10 lacs more towards the interest for the delayed payment. When the matter again came up for hearing on 12.02.2024, this Court recorded that the entire amount had been paid and, at the request of both sides, granted time to both sides to draw a settlement. Later on, 11.03.2024, the counsel representing the appellant stated that a settlement had been reached between the parties whereas counsel for respondents sought some time to verify the same, and consequently, the matter was adjourned for today.

Issue: Whether Cheque Dishonour Case Can Be Compounded Without Complainant’s Consent?

Arguments on behalf of counsel for appellant:

The counsel representing the appellant stated that a settlement had been reached between the parties.

Arguments on behalf of counsel for respondents:

The counsel of Respondent No.2 i.e., the complainant states that there is no settlement between the parties and the complainant is not willing to compromise the matter. After the passing of the previous order dated 11.03.2024, Respondent No.2 (Complainant) has also filed an affidavit stating that no settlement has been reached between the parties as alleged by the appellant. On the other side, the counsel of the appellant contended that since the appellant has paid back the entire amount of Rs.1.55 crore and has also paid a further sum of Rs.10 lacs towards the interest, there is no ground left for continuing criminal proceedings against the appellant.

Held: The court disposed off the present appeal and held that, “Even though complainant is unwilling to compound the case but, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the present case which we have referred above, we are of the considered view that these proceedings must come to an end. We, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order of High Court dated 29.11.2022. We also quash all the criminal proceedings qua appellant arising out of FIR No.35 of 2014 at P.S Mahesh Nagar, Ambala pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala. Since, criminal appeals filed by present appellant against his conviction under Section 138 of the NI Act are also pending, we deem it appropriate that the said proceedings should also be quashed. Hence, in order to do complete justice, we exercise our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, and hereby quash all the pending criminal appeals on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala Cantt., against the appellant.”