As per case facts, the Petitioner borrowed money from the Respondent, issuing a cheque for business that was dishonored due to 'Account Closed'. Despite a legal notice, payment was not ... made. The Petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to imprisonment and a small fine, with no compensation. The appellate court upheld this. The Petitioner challenged the judgment in the High Court, which noted the meager fine and lack of compensation despite the large amount and time elapsed. The question arose on the trial Court's approach to sentencing under Section 138, specifically whether the fine should be sufficient to cover the complainant's liability. Finally, the High Court ruled that the compensatory aspect should be prioritized, and the fine must be adequate to compensate the complainant, possibly including interest. It set aside the previous orders and remanded the case for de novo sentencing, stressing the importance of uniformity in judgments.