CRR No.2494 IN 274 Subhash Sunil CORAM: Present: SUMEET 1. setting asid Additional dismissed t conviction/ Magistrate was convic Negotiable Imprisonme complainan 2. pendency o have amica 2494 of 2024 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIG ***** Versus AM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUM Mr. Madan Sandhu, Advocate, Mr. Shivam Sharma, Advocate --- EET GOEL, J. (ORAL) The present criminal revision g aside of the impugned order dated tional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad (f issed the appeal preferred by the petit iction/order of sentence dated 27/30.4 istrate Ist Class, Fatehabad (for short convicted for commission of offence tiable Instruments Act, 1881 and wa isonment for 01 year and to pay com lainant. Learned counsel for the petitio ency of proceedings, the petitioner amicably settled the matter. Vide ord -1- F PUNJAB AND HARYANA NDIGARH CRR No.2494 of 2024 (O & M Date of decision : 12.5.202 Date of uploading : 13.5.202 ………….Petitioner ersus …….Respondent SUMEET GOEL vocate, for the petitioner vocate, for the respondent vision petition has been filed seekin ated 2.12.2024, vide which, the learne bad (for short ‘Sessions Judge’), e petitioner, as well as the judgment o 7/30.4.2018 passed by learned Judici short ‘JMIC’), whereby the petition ffence punishable under Section 138 o nd was sentenced to undergo Rigorou y compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- to th petitioner has submitted that during th tioner and the respondent/complaina de order dated 9.12.2024 passed by th O & M) .5.2026 .5.2026 seeking learned e’), has ment of Judicial etitioner 138 of igorous to the ring the plainant by this ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.13 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2494 Court, the directed to weeks. Re the matter settlement DLSA, Fate in pursuanc shape of an has further dispute(s), the charge( 3. factum of s and has fu 22.1.2025 iterated tha offence is acquitted. 4. perused the 5. three Judge Prabhu vs. thus: 2494 of 2024 (O & M) t, the matter was referred to DLSA, ted to deposit an amount of ₹75,000 s. Report of Mediator dated 24.1.20 matter has been compromised betwe ment dated 22.1.2025 (copy whereof Fatehabad. Learned counsel for th rsuance of the aforesaid order, has a e of an FDR before the trial Court. further submitted that since the par te(s), the matter may be compounded harge(s) framed against him. Learned counsel appearing fo m of settlement/compromise having b has further vouched the genuineness 2025 stated to be arrived between t ed that the respondent/complainant ce is permitted to be compounded an itted. I have heard learned counse ed the available record. It would be apposite to refer Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supre u vs. Sayed Babalal H., AIR 2010(S “15. With regard to the progres cases, the learned Attorney Gen guidelines for a graded scheme of delay compounding of the offence. -2- LSA, Fatehabad and the petitioner wa 75,000/-before the trial Court within 4.1.2025 has been received stating th between the parties vide agreemen ereof appended at Flag ‘A’) before th for the petitioner, to prove his bonafid has also deposited Rs.75,000/- in th urt. Learned counsel for the petition e parties have amicably settled the unded and the petitioner be acquitted o ring for the respondent has ratified th ving been arrived at between the partie neness of the compromise deed date ween the parties. Accordingly, he ha ainant has no objection, in case, th ded and the petitioner is ordered to b ounsel for the rival parties and hav refer herein to a judgment passed b Supreme Court titled as Damodar 010(SC) 1907, relevant whereof read gression of litigation in cheque bounci General has urged this Court to fram e of imposing costs on parties who undu nce. It was submitted that the requirement ner was hin 3 ting that eement/ fore the onafide in the etitioner ed their uitted of fied the e parties d dated he has ase, the ed to be nd have ssed by dar S. of reads uncing frame unduly ent of ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.13 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2494 2494 of 2024 (O & M) deposit of the costs will act as a d at present, free and easy compoun belated, gives an incentive to the dr cases for years. An application for not only results in the system bein deprived of effective justice. In vie following guidelines be followed:- THE GUIDELINES (i) In the circumstances, it i (a) That directions can be suitably modified making it an application for compou second hearing of the case compounding may be allow costs on the accused. (b) If the accused does not as aforesaid, then if an a before the Magistrate at a allowed subject to the cond to pay 10% of the cheque am compounding with the Lega as the Court deems fit. (c) Similarly, if the applica the Sessions Court or a H compounding may be allow pays 15% of the cheque am (d) Finally, if the applicatio Supreme Court, the figure amount. Let it also be clarified that these guidelines should be deposi operating at the level of the Court For instance, in case of compound before a Magistrate's Court or a C deposited with the District Lega imposed in connection with compo deposited with the State Legal Se connection with composition be deposited with the National Legal S xxx xxx xxx xxx 17. We are also conscious of th the above quoted guidelines cou making and therefore an intrusion kept in mind that Section 147 of th how to proceed with the compound already explained that the scheme CrPC cannot be followed in the vacuum, we see no hurdle to the e have been designed to discourag composition of the offence in case graded scheme for imposing costs at an early stage of litigation. In th is spent on the trial of these cases a Court fee since the proceedings a Procedure, even though the impact -3- a deterrent for delayed composition, sin pounding of offences at any stage, howev he drawer of the cheque to delay settling t for compounding made after several yea being burdened but the complainant is al view of this submission, we direct that t - , it is proposed as follows: n be given that the Writ of Summons ng it clear to the accused that he could ma mpounding of the offences at the first ase and that if such an application is mad allowed by the court without imposing a not make an application for compoundi an application for compounding is ma at a subsequent stage, compounding can condition that the accused will be requir ue amount to be deposited as a condition f Legal Services Authority, or such author plication for compounding is made befo a High Court in revision or appeal, su allowed on the condition that the accus amount by way of costs. ication for compounding is made before t ure would increase to 20% of the cheq that any costs imposed in accordance w posited with the Legal Services Author ourt before which compounding takes plac unding during the pendency of proceedin r a Court of Sessions, such costs should Legal Services Authority. Likewise, co mposition before the High Court should l Services Authority and those imposed before the Supreme Court should gal Services Authority. xxx xxx xxx xxx of the view that the judicial endorsement could be seen as an act of judicial la sion into the legislative domain. It must of the Act does not carry any guidance ounding of offences under the Act. We ha eme contemplated under Section 320 of t the strict sense. In view of the legislati the endorsement of some suggestions whi urage litigants from unduly delaying t cases involving Section 138 of the Act. T osts is a means to encourage compoundi In the status quo, valuable time of the Cou ses and the parties are not liable to pay a gs are governed by the Code of Crimin pact of the offence is largely confined to t , since owever ing the l years is also hat the ons be d make irst or made, ng any unding made can be quired ion for thority before l, such ccused ore the cheque e with thority place. edings uld be , costs uld be sed in uld be ent of l law- ust be nce on e have of the islative which ng the ct. The unding Court ay any riminal to the ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.13 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2494 5.1. New Win Law Heral 5.2. as Sanjabij held as und 2494 of 2024 (O & M) private parties. Even though the im is a matter of discretion, the sca interest of uniformity. The compete with regard to the specific facts recording reasons in writing for su of course contest the proceedings this Court has used its power to d the Constitution to frame guidelin there was a legislative vacuum.” Further the Hon’ble Supreme in Export &Anr. vs. A. Subrama erald (SC) 2098, relevant whereof re “6. At this juncture, we woul regarding the principles of compo Act. It is to be remembered that offence which was made an offenc the reliability of these instrument cases involving dishonour of chequ serious concern for our judicia ‘compensatory aspect’ of remedy aspect’, courts should encourage Act if parties are willing to do Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663 Manoj Goel (2022) 11 SCC 705 Private Limited And Anr. v. Kan 18.2)” More recently, the Hon’ble Su jabij Tari vs. Kishore S. Borcar and as under: “38. Since a very large number of c and interest rates have fallen in the that it is time to 'revisit and tw aforesaid guidelines of compoundin (a) If the accused pays the che evidence (namely defence eviden compounding of the offence witho accused. (b) If the accused makes the pay recording of his evidence but prio the Trial Court, the Magistrate ma payment of additional 5% of the c Authority or such other Authority a (c) Similarly, if the payment of che Court or a High Court in Revision the offence on the condition that amount by way of costs. -4- e imposition of costs by the competent cou scale of costs has been suggested in t petent Court can of course reduce the co acts and circumstances of a case, wh or such variance. Bona fide litigants shou ings to their logical end. Even in the pa to do complete justice under Article 142 delines in relation to subject-matter whe reme Court in a judgment titled as M amaniam 2024 INSC 535 : 2024( reof reads as under: would also like to reiterate a few wor mpounding of offences in the context of that dishonour of cheques is a regulato ffence only in view of public interest so th ments can be ensured. A large number heques are pending before courts which is icial system. Keeping in mind that t edy shall have priority over the ‘puniti age compounding of offences under the o so. (See: Damodar S. Prabhu v. Say 63 (Para 18), Gimpex Private Limited 705 (Para 29), Meters And Instrumen Kanchan Mehta (2018) 1 SCC 560(Pa ’ble Supreme Court in a judgment tile r and another = 2025 INSC 1158, r of cheque bouncing cases are still pendi n the last few years, this Court is of the vi d tweak the guidelines'. Accordingly, t ding are modified as under:- cheque amount before recording of h idence), then the Trial Court may allo ithout imposing any cost or penalty on t payment of the cheque amount post t prior to the pronouncement of judgment e may allow compounding of the offence the cheque amount with the Legal Servic ity as the Court deems fit. cheque amount is made before the Sessio ision or Appeal, such Court may compou that the accused pays 7.5% of the cheq t court in the e costs while should e past, 142 of where M/s 024(3) words t of NI ulatory so that ber of ich is a at the unitive the NI Sayed ited v. uments (Para ent tiled 8, has ending e view ly, the of his allow on the ost the ent by nce on ervices essions pound cheque ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.13 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2494 5.3. 320 of Cr.P when exam the judgme Prabhu (su lead to the Negotiable litigation, in been conclu In other wo the petition and his app Court. 5.4. Prabhu (su imposed wh of 1881 is c been under from undu discretion reduce/waiv warrant. Th revisited th costs upon judgment o 2494 of 2024 (O & M) (d) Finally, if the cheque amount i would increase to 10% of the chequ The statutory provision of Sec of Cr.P.C., 1973) and Section 147 of N examined alongwith Section 528 of B udgments of the Hon’ble Supreme (supra), M/s New Win Export (s to the unequivocal conclusion that th tiable Instruments Act, 1881 can b tion, including when the matter has rea conclusively dealt with by the Magis her words, such an offence can be com etitioner-accused has been convicted b is appeal against the same has been d The Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra) has also enunciated tha sed when the offence under Section 1 81 is compounded at a stage when sub undertaken by the Courts so as to d unduly delaying the compoundin etion has been reserved in favou e/waive such costs, in case facts/ci ant. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in c ited the guidelines, insofar as it relates upon the accused, but has not mod ent of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra) w -5- unt is tendered before this Court, the figu heque amount.” of Section 359 of BNSS, 2023 (Sectio 47 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 188 8 of BNSS, 2023 in the guiding light o reme Court in cases of Damodar (supra) and Sanjabij Tari (supra that the offence under Section 138 o can be compounded at all stages o has reached the High Court after havin Magisterial as also the Sessions Cour e compromised/compounded even aft icted by the Court of learned Magistra been dismissed by the learned Session Court in the judgment of Damodar d that, ordinarily, costs ought to b tion 138 of Negotiable Instruments A en substantial proceedings have alread s to dissuade the unscrupulous litiga unding of such offences. Howeve favour of the concerned Court acts/circumstances of a given case s rt in case of Sanjabij Tari (supra) ha relates to the quantum of imposition o t modified the leeway granted in th pra) which permits reduction or waiv figure (Section ct, 1881 light of dar S. (supra), 138 of tages of r having s Court. en after agistrate essions dar S. t to be ents Act already litigant owever, ourt to case so pra) has sition of in the r waiver ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.13 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2494 of costs bas recording o that liberty may be exe Court, the however, im of costs is such discr accentuatin concerned rule of imp record clea justify the intent and criminaliza discipline a 5.5. Section 528 process an essentially the High C continued circumstanc powers, in helplessly injustice. I 2494 of 2024 (O & M) sts based on the factual milieu of a pa ding of reasons for such variance. For liberty reserved in favour of the courts be exercised by any of the courts seiz t, the Sessions Court or the magiste ver, imperative to bear in mind that d sts is not to be invoked as a matter of discretion must be predicated upo tuating circumstances which, in t erned Court seized of the matter, wa of imposition of cost. The Court, whi d clear, cogent and reasoned findings d y the waiver. This requirement is in t and the underlying purpose so inalization of the act of dishonor of c pline and uphold the credibility and san Still further, the inherent juris on 528 BNSS, 2023 is primarily aime ss and securing the ends of justic ly personal in nature and a genuin igh Court may intervene to quash nued proceedings would be non-pro mstances. The inherent powers of a H rs, in the absence of which, the Cour essly witness the process of law be tice. In other words; such power(s) -6- of a particular case albeit subject to th ce. For the sake of clarity it is reiterate courts to waive the imposition of cos rts seized of the matter—be it the Hig agisterial Court conducting trial. It i that discretion to waive the impositio tter of ordinary course. The exercise o d upon exceptional, compelling an , in the considered opinion of th er, warrant deviation from the gener rt, while invoking such discretion, mu dings delineating the special factors th t is in consonance with the legislativ se sought to be achieved by th or of cheque, i.e. to inculcate financi and sanctity of negotiable instruments. nt jurisdiction of the High Court und y aimed at preventing abuse of judici justice. Thus, where the dispute genuine compromise has been reache quash the conviction, recognizing th productive and unjust in the give of a High Court are incidental reple Court would be obliged to sit still an law being abused for the purposes o wer(s) is intrinsic to the High Cour ct to the eiterated of costs he High al. It is, position rcise of ing and of the general n, must tors that gislative by the inancial ments. rt under judicial spute is reached, ing that e given l replete still and oses of Court, ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.13 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2494 forming its such power powers of possible am of a High power(s) to being obstr laws attem circumstanc impossible fact arises. indefatigab with situati be dealt w Courts. The the seminal to fulfill th law, in a re of BNSS, 2 may be inv ensure the oppression, secure the inherent po conviction 2494 of 2024 (O & M) ing its very life-blood, its very essence power(s), a High Court would retain rs of a High Court hence deserve t ble amplitude. These inherent powers High Court which ought to be, and r(s) to maintain its authority to preven obstructed or abused. It is a trite p attempt to deal with all cases that m mstances which shape events and the i ssible to lay down provisions capable arises. A High Court which exists fo atigable manner, should therefore, h situations which, though not expressly ealt with, to prevent injustice or the ts. The juridical basis of these plenary eminal duty and responsibility of a Hig lfill the judicial function of administ in a regular, orderly and effective man SS, 2023 reflects peerless and inhere be invoked whenever it is just and eq re the observance of the due process ession, to do justice nay substantial ju e the ends of justice. Therefore, the H ent power under section 528 BNSS, 2 iction where the parties have reached -7- essence, its immanent attribute. Witho retain form but lack substance. Thes serve to be construed with the wide owers are in consonance with the natu e, and has in fact been, invested wi prevent the process of law/Courts fro trite posit of jurisprudence that thoug that may arise, the infinite variety o d the imperfections of language make pable of governing every case, which ists for the furtherance of justice in a fore, have unfettered power(s) to de pressly provided for by the law, need r the abuse of the process of law an lenary power(s) is the authority; in fa f a High Court; to uphold, to protect an ministering justice, in accordance wi ve manner. In other words; Section 52 inherent powers, of a High Court whic and equitable to do so, in particular rocess of law, to prevent vexation o ntial justice between the parties and , the High Court, in the exercise of i SS, 2023 has the discretion to quash ached an amicable settlement, provide Without . These widest e nature ed with rts from though riety of make it hich in ce in an to deal need to law and ; in fact tect and ce with tion 528 rt which icular to ation or s and to se of its quash a rovided ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.13 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2494 that such undermine 6. the concern between th further dire compromis parties refle and bury th the factual permitted to 6.1. circumstanc litigation si to saddle th 7. (i) (ii) (iii) 2494 of 2024 (O & M) such compromise neither impinge rmine the cause justice, as well as the s Reverting to the facts of the c oncerned rival parties that an amicab een them and, therefore, compoundin er directions have been sought from ise/settlement dated 22.1.2025 es reflects that the parties have sought ury the hatchet. Consequently, in the actual matrix of the case requires itted to be compounded and the petitio Keeping in view the ent mstances of the case, the petitioner ha ion since about the year 2018; this C ddle the petitioner with costs. In view of the prevenient ratio The impugned judgment of co 27/30.4.2018 passed by learn order dated 2.12.20245 passe set-aside and the petitioner is The rival parties shall rema settlement/compromise dated the parties before the DLSA compliance thereof, the aggri seek recall of this order, albeit is clarified that in case non- the erring party may be sa measure(s). (iii) Disposed of. -8- pinge upon the public interest no as the substantial justice. f the case in hand, it is not disputed b micable settlement has been arrived ounding of the offence and necessar t from this Court. A perusal of th stated to be arrived between th sought to resolve their dispute(s) in to in the considered opinion of this Cour uires that the offence(s) ought to b petitioner deserves to be acquitted. e entirety of the attending fact oner having faced the wrath of crimin this Court does not deem it appropria t ratiocination, it is ordained thus: t of conviction/order of sentence date learned JMIC, as also the impugne passed by learned Sessions Judge, a ner is acquitted. l remain bound by the terms of th dated 22.1.2025 entered into betwee DLSA, Fatehabad. In case of non aggrieved party shall be at liberty lbeit upon showing sufficient cause. -compliance is found to be show be saddled with exemplary punitiv est nor uted by rived at ecessary of the een the toto s Court, t to be facts/ criminal ropriate ce dated pugned dge, are of the between of non- berty to cause. It shown, punitive ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.13 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2494 (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix)
12.5.2026 Ashwani


2494 of 2024 (O & M) (vi) No order as to costs. (vii) Pending application(s), if any, (viii) It is common ground between amount of ₹75,000/- deposite dated 9.12.2024 earlier passed petitioner on due identification ix) Ordered accordingly. 2026 
  
Whether reportable: -9- if any, shall also stands disposed of. tween the learned rival counsel that th posited in this Court in terms of ord passed by this Court, be released to th ication. (SUMEET GOEL JUDGE 


Yes/No that the of order d to the GOEL) ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.05.13 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document