Rajeev Khandelwal Vs State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
The appellant was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for cheque dishonour. His appeal before the Sessions Court was dismissed, after which he filed a revision petition before the High Court. During the pendency of the revision, the appellant and the respondent reached a settlement. Based on this agreement, the High Court acquitted the appellant but imposed a condition requiring him to deposit costs with the State Legal Services Authority in accordance with the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H.
The present appeal before the Supreme Court concerned the legality of this cost imposed by the High Court. The appellant argued that the Damodar S. Prabhu judgment involved the exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and therefore should not be treated as binding law applicable to all cases. He further submitted that treating it as mandatory would discourage settlements at the revision stage, and that in this case the direction to pay costs was not for the complainant but for the Legal Services Authority. Since the complainant had no objection to waiving further payment and the appellant was unable to comply, the cost order ought not to stand.
