Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Criminal Appeal No.110 of 2015 Date of Decision: 09.04.2026 ________________________________________________________________ Hukam Chand …….Appellant Versus Raj Pal
… Respondent ________________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Appellant: Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Ajay Chandel, Advocate. ________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Instant Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. lays challenge to the judgment dated 22.11.2014, passed by learned Special Magistrate, Kullu, in Cr. Complaint No.594- 1/2013, whereby complaint filed by the appellant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act came to be dismissed.
2. Before case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merits, learned counsel representing the parties expressed their intention to get their matter settled by way of mediation and as such, this Court referred the matter to Mr. Aman Sood, learned Mediator, for mediation.
3. It is heartening to note that with the sincere efforts put in by the learned Mediator, parties have able to settle the matter for a sum of ₹1,00,000/-, as is evident from the orders 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2 dated 15.12.2025, 02.03.2026 and 07.04.2026, which are already made part of the mediation record. As per the compromise, sum of ₹66,000/- was received by the complainant on 02.03.2026 and remaining sum of ₹34,000/- was to be paid on or before
31.03.2026.
4. Mr. Maan Singh, learned counsel representing the appellant, fairly states that sum of ₹34,000/- has also been received by the appellant and as such, as of today entire amount in terms of compromise stands received. He states that in view of aforesaid compromise, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings.
5. In view of the above, present appeal is disposed of, as compromised. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge April 09, 2026 (Rajeev Raturi)