Page 1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.587 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO. 4088/2011]

A.T. SIVAPERUMAL APPELLANT(S)

                               VERSUS

MOHAMMED HYATH (D) BY LRS. RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T R. BANUMATHI, J.

1. Leave granted.   2. This appeal arises out of the judgment of the High  Court  of  Karnataka  at  Bangalore  in  Crl.  A. No.895 of 2004 in and by which the High Court set aside the acquittal of the appellant and convicted him  for  the  offence  under  Section  138  of  the Negotiable  Instruments  Act  and  imposing  a  fine  of Rs.11,00,000/-  (Rupees  Eleven  Lacs),  in  default  to undergo  simple  imprisonment  for  a  period  of  six months.  Out of the fine amount, the High Court has directed  that a sum of Rs.10,50,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs Fifty Thousand) be paid as compensation to the

1

Page 2

legal  representatives  of  the  complainant/Mohammed Hyath. 3. The  case  of  the  complainant/Mohammed  Hyath  is that  the  appellant/accused  borrowed  a  sum  of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs), on 01.01.2002, from him as a loan to develop his A.T.S. Groundnuts Sweets Factory at Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore and undertook to  repay  it  on  or  before  16.08.2002  with  simple interest.  Further case of the complainant is that towards  discharge  of  the  said  liability,  the appellant/accused  issued  a  cheque  for  a  sum  of Rs.10,22,419/-  dated  14.11.2002  drawn  on  Karnataka Industrial Co-operative Bank Limited, Bangalore Rural Branch,  Chamarajpet,  Bangalore.   The  said  cheque, when it was presented for realization, was returned with the endorsement “account closed”.  After issuing the  statutory  notice,  the  complainant  had  filed  a complaint  under  Section  138  of  the  Negotiable Instruments  Act  in  C.C.  No.40274/2002  before  the XVIII ACMM & XX ASCJ, Bangalore City. 4. The Trial Court by its judgment dated 27.04.2004 acquitted  the  appellant/accused  on  the  ground  that the  complainant  has  not  proved  the  case  beyond reasonable doubt as the documentary and also the oral evidence  adduced  by  the  appellant/accused substantiates the defence plea of the accused.  Being

2

Page 3

aggrieved,  the  said  complainant  preferred  appeal before the High Court in Criminal Appeal No.895 of 2004, in and by which the High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted the appellant as aforesaid in paragraph  (2).   Being  aggrieved,  the appellant/accused is before us in this appeal by way of special leave. 5.  When  the  special  leave  petition  came  up  for hearing,  by  order  dated  12.05.2011  this  Court  had granted stay on condition that the appellant herein should  deposit  an  amount  of  Rs.3,00,000/-  (Rupees Three Lacs) before the Trial Court i.e. the Court of Small Causes and ACMM, Bangalore, which has been duly complied with.  The matter was lingering on file for quite some time.  When the matter came up for hearing today i.e. on 27.03.2017, the son of the appellant, by  name  Srinivasan,  was  present  in  the  Court. Respondent  No.4/Abdul  Kaleem,  was  present  in  the Court,  who stated  that he  is representing  all the legal representatives of  complainant/Mohammed Hyath. We  suggested  to  the  parties  and  to  their  counsel whether they can talk to each other to arrive at an amicable settlement, for which both the parties as well as Ms. Lata Krishnamurti and Mr. A.T.M. Sampath, learned  counsel  appearing  for  the  parties  readily agreed.

3

Page 4

6. After  talking  to  each  other  the  parties  have arrived  at  a  settlement  for  a  sum  of Rs.6,00,000/-(Rupees Six Lacs) including the amount of  Rs.3,00,000/-  (Rupees  Three  Lacs)  already deposited before the Trial Court. 7. In the result, the impugned judgment of the High Court rendered in Criminal Appeal No.895 of 2004 is set aside and this appeal is allowed.  The appellant is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 8. The  respondents  are  permitted  to  withdraw Rs.3,00,000/-  (Rupees  Three  Lacs)  deposited  before the  Court  of  Small  Causes  and  A.C.M.M.  Court, Bangalore forthwith, along with the accrued interest, on filing necessary application. 9. The appellant is granted three months' time from today  to  pay  to  the  respondents  a  further  sum  of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs) by way of demand draft  in  favour  of  Abdul  Kaleem.   The  appellant (represented  by  his  son)  is  directed  to  file affidavit of undertaking to this effect before this Court within a period of one week.  On failure to pay the said amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs) within  the  time  granted,  the  appellant  shall  be proceeded with for contempt, in addition to the other proceedings, in accordance with law.

4

Page 5

10. Pending  applications,  if  any,  shall  stand disposed of.

.......................J.               [KURIAN JOSEPH]  

.......................J.               [R. BANUMATHI]  

NEW DELHI; MARCH 27, 2017.

5