Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (crl.) 789 of 2000
PETITIONER:
CRANEX LTD. AND ANR.
RESPONDENT:
NAGARJUNA FINANCE LTD. AND ANR.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 14/09/2000
BENCH:
M. JAGANNADHA RAO & M.B. SHAH
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
2000 Supp(3) SCR 300
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Leave granted. The case involves a settlement of the money claim during the
pendency of a criminal appeal arising out of proceedings under Section 138
of the Negotiable instruments Act. The main appeal, namely Criminal Appeal
No. 59/99, against the conviction is pending before the Vlth Additional
Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad in the matter arising under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. That is an appeal against
the order dated 8.2.99 of the XVth Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad,
Sentencing the appellant No. 2, representing the firm, to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for 6 months and further to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000 or in
default, to udergo simple imprisonment for a further period of 3 months.
There is also a direction against the 2nd appellant representing the 1st
appellant Company, to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000 or in default to undergo
simple imprisonment for 3 months. The appeal against the conviction and
sentence is pending as aforesaid, before the VI Additional Metropolitan
Sessions Judge, Secunderabad.
At that stage, it appears that some interlocutory applications were filed
by the appellants in the appellate Court and the said applications were
dismissed. Against the said order a revision case No. 91/2000 was filed in
the High Court and it was also dismissed. This appeal has been preferred
against the said order passed by the High Court in the interlocutory
proceedings.
During the pendency of the case, there appears to be a settlement of the
money-dispute between the parties. On 24.8.2000 this Court passed an order
as follows :
"Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners would
deposit the cheque amount (Rs. 5,96,688) which was dishonoured within three
weeks from today before the XV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. In this
view of the matter, stand over for three weeks. Application for
substituting the name of Mr. S.C. Agrawal as Managing Director of the
petitioner No. 1’s firm in place of Mr. Piyus Agrawal, Managing Director is
allowed".
It appears, subsequent to the said order, the appellant has deposited a sum
of Rs. 5,96,688 in the Court of the XV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.
A Certificate to that effect issued by the said Court has been filed by the
counsel for the petitioners, in this Court.
In the light of the subsequent developments in the case, we are of the view
that the order passed in the Interlocutory application be set aside and the
matter be remitted to the Appellate Court where the appeal is pending. We
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
order accordingly. The appellate Court will consider the subsequent events,
namely, of the appellant having paid a sum of Rs. 5,96,688 under a
settlement to the 1st respondent and will dispose of the appeal in
accordance with law. On merits, it will be open even to set aside the
conviction in accordance with law. Otherwise, it has power to convict or
direct sentence of imprisonment or fine. The appellate Court can therefore
take the subsequent events into account and pass such order as it may deem
fit in the appeal. Under Section 138 the Court can, if it is inclined to
convict, pass an order of imprisonment or even fine.-
The impugned order passed by the High Court in the present interlocutory
proceedings is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Appellate Court,
namely the Vlth Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad, as
stated above.
We also record the statement of the learned counsel for the respondent that
if the amount deposited is permitted to be withdrawn by the first
respondent, then the 1st respondent will not press before the Appellate
Court for a conviction or for a sentence be it for imprisonment or fine. In
such circumstances, the Appellate Court will consider whether the
conviction is to be maintained or an order of imposition of fine is to be
passed, in the light of the stand taken by the counsel for the 1 st
respondent.
We direct the Court in which the deposit has been made, to allow the 1st
respondent to withdraw the amount accordingly. With the above directions
the appeal is disposed of.