CRR-2776-2023 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-2776-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 06.07.2026 Manoj Kumar ………Petitioner Versus M/s Ram Lal Kalu Ram and another ..….Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Ivan Singh Khosa, Advocate and Mr. Aarjav Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Arun Luthra, Advocate and Ms. Mehak Shara, Advocate, for respondent No.1 VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J (Oral). The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 20.02.2023 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, whereby while dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner, the judgment of conviction dated 06.02.2018 and order of sentence dated 07.02.2018 passed by the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gohana, Sonipat, convicting the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short `the NI Act’) and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of DALBIR SINGH 2026.07.10 11.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-2776-2023 (O&M) -2- one year and to pay compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-, were upheld. 2. It may be noticed that when the matter came up for hearing before a Coordinate Bench on 03.08.2024, the following order was passed:- “Custody certificate has been filed, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that sentence of the petitioner was suspended vide order dated 04.12.2023 till the next date of hearing passed by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court to facilitate the petitioner to explore the possibility of settlement. He has presented a copy of the order dated 09.02.2024 passed by the Ld. SDJM, Gohana and whereby it is mentioned that parties have settled the matter and sum of Rs.3,50,000/- has been paid to the complainant. A copy of the said order is taken on record. As per report of the Registry, notice issued to the complainant/respondent No.1 was duly served but none has appeared on his behalf. Let, fresh notice be issued to respondent No.1, for 18.11.2024. In the meantime, interim order to continue.” 3. A perusal of the file shows that thereafter, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, pursuant to the Special Campaign-Mediation `For the Nation’. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as reflected in the order dated 30.08.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench, in terms of the settlement between the parties, a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- stands already paid by the petitioner to the respondent-complainant. Learned counsel further submits that as the settled amount stands paid and the DALBIR SINGH 2026.07.10 11.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-2776-2023 (O&M) -3- petitioner is ready to deposit 7.5% of the settled amount before the authority concerned, as may be directed by this Court, the petitioner may be permitted to get the offence compounded in view of recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sanjabij Tari v. Kishore S. Borcar & Another, 2025(4) RCR (Criminal) 420. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the aforesaid factual position. 5. In Sanjabij Tari's case (supra), the Hon’ble Apex Court, has issued fresh guidelines in modification of guidelines earlier issued in the judgment reported as Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., (2010) 5 SCC 663. The said guidelines read as under:- "38. Since a very large number of cheque bouncing cases are still pending and interest rates have fallen in the last few years, this Court is of the view that it is time to 'revisit and tweak the guide-lines'. Accordingly, the aforesaid guidelines of compounding are modified as under:- (a) If the accused pays the cheque amount before recording of his evidence (namely defence evidence), then the Trial Court may allow compounding of the offence without imposing any cost or penalty on the accused. (b) If the accused makes the payment of the cheque amount post the recording of his evidence but prior to the pronouncement of judgment by the Trial Court, the Magistrate may allow compounding of the offence on payment of additional 5% of the cheque amount DALBIR SINGH 2026.07.10 11.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-2776-2023 (O&M) -4- with the Legal Services Authority or such other Authority as the Court deems fit. (c) Similarly, if the payment of cheque amount is made before the Sessions Court or a High Court in Revision or Appeal, such Court may compound the offence on the condition that the accused pays 7.5% of the cheque amount by way of costs. (d) Finally, if the cheque amount is tendered before this Court, the figure would increase to 10% of the cheque amount. 39. This Court is of the view that if the accused is willing to pay in accordance with the aforesaid guidelines, the Court may suggest to the parties to go for compounding. If for any reason, the financial institutions/complainant asks for payment other than the cheque amount or settlement of entire loan or other outstanding dues, then the Magistrate may suggest to the Accused to plead guilty and exercise the power under Section 255(2) and/or 255(3) of the Cr.P.C. or 278 of the BNSS, 2023 and/or give the benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to the Accused.” 6. In the present case, the entire settled amount has been paid by the petitioner to the respondent-complainant before the trial Court. Learned counsel for the respondent- complainant has not opposed the prayer for compounding of the offence. There is, thus, no impediment in compounding the offence in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sanjabij Tari’s case (supra). 7. Resultantly, the instant petition is allowed. The judgments passed by both the Courts are set aside and the DALBIR SINGH 2026.07.10 11.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-2776-2023 (O&M) -5- petitioner is acquitted of the notice of accusation for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the NI Act, subject to the condition that he will deposit 7.5% of the settled amount by way of costs within one month from today in the office of District Legal Services Authority, Sonepat. On his failure to deposit the amount, the revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed and he shall serve the sentence awarded by the trial Court. Copy of the judgment be sent to trial Court for compliance. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE 06.07.2026 ds Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No DALBIR SINGH 2026.07.10 11.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document