-
by sayum
19 December 2025 10:48 AM
High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashes conviction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act following amicable settlement between parties. In a recent judgment, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashed the conviction and sentence of Hari Om Sharma under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, following a settlement between the parties. The court, presided by Justice Anoop Chitkara, highlighted the jurisprudence behind the Negotiable Instruments Act and the significance of amicable resolutions in economic offenses.
Hari Om Sharma was convicted by the trial court and sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment along with a compensation of Rs. 5,50,000 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The conviction was upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge, District Kurukshetra. Subsequently, Sharma sought revision of the judgment in the High Court under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the CrPC, citing a compromise with the complainant, Raj Kumar.
The High Court noted that the essence of the Negotiable Instruments Act is to ensure that business transactions are honored and not necessarily to incarcerate individuals for bounced cheques. The court referred to several precedents where convictions were set aside based on compromise between parties, emphasizing the legislative intention behind the Act.
Justice Anoop Chitkara cited various Supreme Court judgments that upheld the validity of compromises in similar cases, including Ram Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ramji Lal v. State of Haryana. These precedents demonstrated the judiciary’s support for settlements in fostering harmony and resolving disputes amicably.
The court emphasized that the proceedings under Section 138 of the NIA are primarily to recover the cheque amount and not solely to penalize the defaulters. The judgment stated, "The continuation of these proceedings will not serve any fruitful purpose whatsoever," highlighting the judicial preference for compromise in economic offenses.
Justice Chitkara remarked, "The finest hour of Justice arises propitiously when parties, who fell apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship or reunion," quoting the Supreme Court's observation in Shakuntala Sawhney v. Kaushalya Sawhney.
The High Court’s decision to quash the conviction underscores the judiciary's inclination towards encouraging settlements in economic disputes. This judgment is expected to reinforce the legal framework favoring compromises, thus promoting a more conciliatory approach in handling cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Date of Decision: May 29, 2024