Compromise in cheque bounce case after conviction is possible or not. I am accused in a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The complainant is my relative and the matter is related to the supply of a disposal making machine including a dryer. When the cheque was issued total liability was around five lakh. Since the complainant is my cousin, I took time to pay that amount. Meanwhile some misunderstanding crept between us and he presented that cheque for encashment. When the cheque was bounced he lodged a complaint against me. Now the court has convicted me for the imprisonment of one year. After conviction I filed an appeal, but during this period some friends and relatives came and compromised the dispute. Now I want to know whether the parties can compromise the cheque bounce case after the conviction.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act makes every offence under the Act compoundable. This section does not impose any restrictions on the stage at which compounding can take place or whether it requires the complainant’s initiation or the court’s permission.
As a result, the court is empowered to compound the case based on a compromise reached between the parties, even at the appellate stage. In O.P. Dholakia v. State of Haryana (2000) 1 SCC 762, the Supreme Court held that the compounding of an offence at a later stage of proceedings is permissible. Therefore, the Negotiable Instruments Act does not prevent the court from compounding an offence at the appellate stage.
When the parties have resolved their dispute through a compromise and the complainant or aggrieved person no longer wishes to prosecute the accused, the court can compound the case and acquit the accused of all charges. However, in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Babulal (2010) 5 SCC 663, the Supreme Court directed that an appellate court may impose a cost on the accused if he opts for a compromise at a later stage of the proceedings. Specifically, at the appellate stage, the accused must pay 15% of the cheque amount before compounding the offence.
Thus, while the court may impose a cost, the compromise and compounding of the offence can still be effectuated at the appellate stage.