IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Revision No. 60 of 2021 Date of Decision: 24.06.2026. Pratap Singh ...Petitioner Versus JP Motors, Solan ...Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr. Naveen K. Dass, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Arun Kaushal, Advocate. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (Oral) As per report of the Registry an amount of ₹2,625/- being the 7.5% of the cheque amount of ₹35,000/- has been deposited. Learned counsel for respondent/complainant, under instructions submits that he does not want to proceed further with the present complaint filed by him. 2. In view of this statement, the present petition is allowed and the judgment passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Solan, District Solan, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 30-S/10 of 2019, titled Partap Singh vs. J.P. Motors Solan affirming the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 judgment of conviction dated 27.07.2019 and order of sentence dated 29.07.2019, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kandaghat, camp at Solan Criminal Case No. 147 of 2013, titled J.P. Motors Solan Vs. Partap Singh are ordered to be set aside and the complaint is dismissed as not pressed. 3. It has been stated that an amount of ₹20,000/- has been deposited before this Court which is to be disbursed to the respondent as per the compromise between the parties. Hence, an amount of ₹20,000/- is ordered to be released to the account of respondent/complainant by remitting it to the bank account of the respondent/complainant, on furnishing of bank details, if not furnished earlier. 4. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 24th June, 2026 (Nikita)