Offer of payment after institution of complaint u/s 138 of NI Act is of no value and is useless.
As regards the contention raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was ready and willing to make thepayment of the dishonoured cheques, it has come on record that the petitioner had refused to accept the legal notice sent by registered post. The notice sent by U.P.C. was received by the petitioner on May 2, 1994, but the petitioner has failed to take notice of it. He did not produce any evidenced show that immediately after the receipt of the notice he had taken steps to make the payment to the respondents, but the same was declined by them. In case, afterfiling of the complaint the petitioner offered to make the payment to the respondents, that is of no value. The object of issuing notice indicating the factum of bouncing of thecheques is to give an opportunity to the drawer to make payment within 15 days, so that it will not be necessary for the payee to proceed against the drawer for any criminal action, even though the Bank had dishonoured the cheques. But after the filing of the complaint, the offer, if any, is useless. It is at the most a mitigating circumstance at the time of conviction. For this view of mine, I am fortified with the authority of Hon'ble the Supreme Court reported as Rajneesh Aggarwal v. Amit J. Bhalla, I (2001) SLT 288=AIR 2001 Supreme Court 518.
Punjab-Haryana High Court
M.M. Chhabra, Director, Sunbeam ... vs Hardev Singh And Anr. on 23 May, 2002
