Underlying offence: Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, Criminal Complaint Case No.143/2012.
Original conviction: 06‑05‑2014, one year simple imprisonment and compensation of Rs 28,00,000 under Section 357(3) CrPC, with default six months imprisonment.
Sessions Judge affirmed conviction on 07‑01‑2015 (Criminal Appeal No.137/2014).
Revision No.111/2015 before High Court dismissed, judgment dated 12‑08‑2024 and 23‑04‑2026; appellant taken into custody on 23‑04‑2026.
Settlement: 25‑04‑2026, complainant agreed to compound offence under Section 147 NI Act on receipt of Rs 30,00,000, paid by accused via Demand Draft and acknowledged.
Application to JMFC rejected; High Court affirmed that judgment cannot be reviewed.
Supreme Court relied on precedent Gian Chand Garg vs. Harpal Singh (2025 SCC OnLine SC 2317).
Parties Involved
Appellant(s): Parsharvanath Weld Wires Pvt Ltd (company) and Director Mr. Hemant Jain, son of Mr. Nandlal Jain.
Respondent(s): State of Chhattisgarh and the complainant (respondent No.2, unnamed).
Counsel for Appellant(s): Mr. Salvador Santosh Rebello (AOR), Mr. Aishwarya Kumar Dubey, Adv., Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv., Ms. Moulishree Pathak, Adv., Ms. Manisha Gupta, Adv., Mr. Nishant Kumar, Adv.
Counsel for Respondent(s): Mr. Parijat Kishore (AOR), Ms. Mudita Arora, Adv., Mr. Aryan Sharma, Adv.
Judges: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prasanna B. Varale.
Issues / Allegations / Violations
Alleged issuance of a dishonoured cheque, constituting an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Conviction and sentencing as detailed above.
Subsequent compounding of the offence under Section 147 of the NI Act following settlement.
Findings & Observations
The Supreme Court accepted the settlement and compounding of the offence, noting that the law permits such compromise.
Cited the decision in Gian Chand Garg vs. Harpal Singh (2025 SCC OnLine SC 2317) to support allowing the compromise.
Determined that the High Court judgment could be reviewed in light of the settlement.
Penalties / Settlements / Directions
Original penalty: Rs 28,00,000 compensation and one‑year simple imprisonment (default six months).
Settlement amount: Rs 30,00,000 paid by the accused, leading to compounding of the offence.
Supreme Court set aside the impugned High Court judgment (CRMP No.1328/2026) and quashed the conviction and sentence.
Directed the Jail Superintendent, Central Jail, Raipur, to release Mr. Hemant Jain immediately and to forward a compliance mail to the Court Registry.
Corrective Actions & Future Obligations
Release of the director from custody as per the Court’s direction.
No further custodial or monetary penalties remain pending.
Parties to comply with the settlement terms and maintain records of the payment.
Final Ruling & Enforcement
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; conviction and sentence quashed.
Immediate release of the appellant/director ordered.
Any pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
