Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Compounding of Offences

Section 147 makes every offence punishable under the Negotiable Instruments Act compoundable notwithstanding the general criminal procedure law referred to in the provision. In cheque dishonour litigation, compounding ordinarily brings the criminal proceeding to an end on a legally recognised settlement between the parties.

Section 147 at a glance

Scope: every offence punishable under the Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable.

Non-obstante clause: Section 147 begins with overriding language referring to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Consent: Supreme Court authority recognises that compounding is based on consent; Section 147 does not permit unilateral compounding merely because the accused offers payment.

Stage: compounding may be considered even at later stages, subject to the applicable judicial principles, settlement terms and orders of the court.

Section 147 - Offences to be compoundable

Statutory rule

Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, every offence punishable under the Negotiable Instruments Act shall be compoundable.

What does compounding of an offence mean?

Compounding is the legally recognised settlement of a criminal offence that the law permits the parties to compound. Section 147 is a special provision making offences punishable under the Negotiable Instruments Act compoundable. Its principal practical importance is in prosecutions under Section 138 for cheque dishonour.

The provision was inserted to facilitate settlement of disputes arising from negotiable instruments and to reduce prolonged criminal litigation where the monetary dispute can be resolved between the parties.

At what stage can a Section 138 offence be compounded?

The Supreme Court has recognised that an offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act may be compounded at different stages of the proceeding, including appellate stages, when the legal requirements for compounding are satisfied. Courts encourage early settlement because delayed compounding consumes judicial time after the parties have already had an opportunity to resolve the monetary dispute.

Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H.

The Supreme Court framed graded-cost guidelines to encourage parties to compound cheque dishonour cases at an early stage. The judgment contemplated no compounding cost at the earliest specified stage and progressively higher costs when settlement is delayed to later judicial stages. The guidelines are judicial directions governing the exercise of compounding jurisdiction and have been considered and applied in later decisions.

Later Supreme Court clarification

The Supreme Court has continued to examine how the Damodar S. Prabhu framework should operate in individual cases and has recognised judicial discretion in the application of compounding costs where the facts justify departure. Current compounding applications should therefore be considered with the latest binding Supreme Court directions rather than treating the graded figures as an inflexible statutory fee.

What is the effect of compounding?

When the offence is validly compounded and the court gives effect to the settlement, the criminal liability arising from the compounded offence is brought to an end in accordance with law. Where compounding occurs after conviction, the competent court may set aside the conviction and sentence as part of the order giving effect to the compounding, depending on the procedural stage and jurisdiction invoked.

SettlementThe parties resolve the compoundable offence on agreed terms.
Court orderThe court records and gives legal effect to compounding where required.
Criminal proceedingThe compounded offence is disposed of in accordance with the resulting judicial order.

CrPC reference in Section 147 and current procedural law

The enacted text of Section 147 expressly refers to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024 and repealed the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 subject to its savings and transitional provisions.

Section 147 should therefore continue to be quoted as enacted. For a current case, the applicable general criminal procedure, transitional provisions and the special overriding effect of Section 147 must be considered according to the date and stage of the proceeding.

Official sources

India Code - Central legislation

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - India Code official text

Supreme Court of India