1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. Revision No. 254 of 2025 Decided on : 14.7.2025 Sukh Ram …Petitioner Versus Pramod Kumar …Respondent ___________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge Whether approved for reporting? ________________________________________________ For the Petitioner : Petitioner in person with Mr. Arsh Chauhan, Advocate vice Mr. Naresh Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Respondent in person with Ms. Sneha Kaushal, Advocate vice Mr. Arvind Negi, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge Petitioner Sukh Ram has filed the present petition, against the judgment dated 29.3.2025, passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P. (hereinafter referred 2 to as ‘the Appellate Court’), in Appeal No. 54/10 of 2023, titled as ‘Sukh Ram versus Pramod Kumar.’ 2. By way of judgment dated 29.3.2025, learned Appellate Court has dismissed the aforesaid appeal, however, modified the order of sentence, dated 22.11.2023, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’), in case No. 253/3 of 2018, titled as, ‘Pramod Kumar versus Sukh Ram’, by virtue of which, the learned Appellate Court has reduced the amount of compensation from Rs. 75,000/- to Rs. 50,000/-. 3. By way of judgment of conviction and order of sentence, as referred to above, the learned trial Court has convicted the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as ‘the accused’) for the commission of offence, punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the N.I. Act’) and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment, for a period of one month and to pay a 3 fine of Rs. 75,000/- to be paid to the complainant, as compensation. 4. During the pendency of the revision petition, before this Court, as per the stand taken by the parties, the matter has been compromised between the parties. This fact is demonstrated from Cr. M.P. No. 2817 of 2025, which has been moved by learned counsel for the petitioner, before this Court, in which, he has prayed that permission to compound the offence may kindly be accorded. 5. The petitioner has made statement, on oath, that the matter has been settled with the respondent with regard to cheque No. 674941, dated 12.6.2018, for a sum of Rs. 50,000/-. 6. The petitioner has further deposed that now nothing is due against him. He has prayed that the present petition be allowed and he may be acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act. 4 7. The respondent/complainant has also made statement, on oath, acknowledging the factual position, as asserted by the petitioner, in his statement. 8. Keeping in view the fact that the parties to the lis have compromised the matter, Cr.M.P. No. 2817 of 2025 is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to compound the offence. 9. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed, by setting aside the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, referred to above, passed by the learned trial Court, as affirmed by the learned Appellate Court, and accused is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, subject to payment of 15% of the cheque amount, as compounding fee. 50% of the compounding fee shall be deposited by the accused with the Member Secretary, H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla, and remaining 50% of the amount shall be deposited 5 by him with the H.P. High Court Staff Welfare Organization, Shimla, within eight weeks, from today. 10. It is further clarified that in case of failure to deposit the compounding fee, within the prescribed period, the revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed and judgment of conviction and order of sentence, shall revive automatically, and the petitioner shall surrender before the learned trial Court to serve out the substantive sentence, imposed by the learned trial Court. 11. The bail bonds furnished by the petitioner/accused are ordered to be discharged. The pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of. (Virender Singh) Judge July 14, 2025 (Kalpana)