- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Sailesh Shyam Parsekar v. Baban Alias Vishwanath S. Godge And Another
Factual and Procedural Background
The appellant was convicted by the trial court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and was sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month and to pay compensation of Rs 39,000, with a further simple imprisonment of six months in default of payment. The Sessions Court, in appeal, confirmed the conviction and sentence. The High Court of Bombay dismissed the appellant’s criminal revision application. The appellant then filed an appeal by special leave.
During the pendency of the appeal, the parties filed a joint compromise petition stating that they had settled their dispute and grievances.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether, in light of the parties’ compromise, the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could be compounded and the appellant’s conviction and sentence set aside.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court noted that the parties had filed a joint petition of compromise stating that they had settled their dispute and grievances. Based on the facts stated in the compromise petition, the Court permitted the parties to compound the offence. Consequently, the Court treated the compromise as sufficient to undo the conviction and sentence in this appeal.
Holding and Implications
ALLOWED; CONVICTION AND SENTENCE SET ASIDE; ACQUITTAL: The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the appellant’s conviction and sentence in view of the compromise, and acquitted him of the charge.
As a direct consequence, the appellant (who was on bail) was discharged from the liability of the bail bonds. The order reflects the outcome based on compromise and does not discuss any broader legal implications or the laying down of new precedent.
Order
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Leave granted.
3. The appellant herein was convicted by the trial court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs 39,000; in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of six months. On appeal being preferred, the Sessions Court confirmed the conviction and sentence. Thereafter, when the matter was taken to the High Court of Bombay, the criminal revision application was dismissed. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
4. A joint petition of compromise has been filed by the parties in which it has been stated that they have settled their dispute and grievances. In view of the facts stated in the compromise petition, we permit the parties to compound the offence.
5. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed, conviction and sentence of the appellant are set aside in view of the compromise and he is acquitted of the charge. The appellant, who is on bail, shall be discharged from the liability of bail bonds.
Alert