Basavaraj vs M/S Dhanlaxmi Finance Co.(R) Terdal

referred to as `the Act'), for having issued a cheque in favour of

the respondent company in the sum of Rs. 22,350/-, which

was dishonoured.

3. The respondent M/s. Dhanlaxmi Finance Co. (R) Terdal

is a finance company. The appellant had availed a loan of

Rs.21,000/- on 31.1.2002. He had issued a cheque on

18.6.2002 for Rs.22,350/-. According to the appellant the

loan had been duly paid but the respondent has failed to

return back the cheque which had been taken by them as

security. The Trial Court convicted the appellant to undergo

six months simple imprisonment and also to pay

compensation of Rs.35,000/- to the complainant.

4. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Magistrate, the

appellant preferred criminal appeal in the Court of Fast Track,

Court No.2, Bangalore at Bagalkot. The appeal was dismissed

on 30.10.2006. The appellant, therefore, challenged the order

in appeal by way of criminal revision before the High Court of 3

Karnataka at Bangalore. The High Court dismissed the

criminal revision. Therefore, this appeal by special leave is

filed against the order of the High Court.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has not

challenged the conviction of the appellant. He has restricted

the submission only to the question of sentence. Learned

counsel submitted that the respondent is a thriving company

in finance. The appellant is a small time petty businessman.

He had given a blank signed cheque to the respondent

company as security apart from other loan papers. He has in

fact discharged the loan in time. However in view of the

conviction of the appellant which had been upheld in appeal

as well as the criminal revision, a prayer is made for leniency.

It is stated that the appellant had already deposited

Rs.5,000/- on 9.2.2007 during the pendency of the

proceedings before the High Court. He has also deposited

Rs.1,000/- being the fine amount imposed by the Magistrate.

During the pendency of the proceedings in this Court, the 4

appellant deposited a sum of Rs.35,000/-. Therefore, the

entire compensation as directed by the Trial Court has been

paid together with the fine.

6. Upon consideration of the entire matter we are of the

considered opinion that in the facts and circumstances of this

case, ends of justice would be served by suitably reducing the

sentence.

7. The appellant has been facing criminal prosecution for

the last 7 years. He is a petty businessman. He has paid the

hefty amount of compensation as a penalty for dishonour of

the cheque issued by him. No material has been placed on the

record to indicate that the appellant had earlier committed any

such or similar offence.

8. In view of the foregoing, the conviction under Section 138

of the Act is maintained. The substantive sentence of

imprisonment is set aside. However, sentence of a fine of 5

Rs.1,000/- is maintained and imposition of compensation in

the sum of Rs.35,000/- is also maintained. The order of the

Trial Court confirmed by the Fast Track Court is modified to

that extent.

9. The appeal is, therefore, disposed of accordingly.

.........................................J (TARUN CHATTERJEE)

..........................................J (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR)

NEW DELHI DATED: DECEMBER 8, 2009