In which judgment, under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that though compounding requires consent of both the parties, but even in absence of such consent, the Court can, in the Interest of justice, on being satisfied that the complainant has been duly compensated, in its discretion, close the proceedings and discharge the accused:
Explanation:
In Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayyed Bala Lal H., the Supreme Court provided comprehensive guidelines for compounding of offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Court held that while compounding generally requires the consent of both parties, the courts have the discretion to close proceedings and discharge the accused in the interest of justice, even without explicit consent, if the complainant has been duly compensated.