IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP No. 5508 of 2025 in Cr.Revision No. 707 of 2022 Date of Decision: 10.03.2026. Rangeen Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Arun Dogra & anr. ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate Vice Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Munish Datwalia, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.2. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (Oral) A receipt of ₹37,500/- being the 15% of the cheque amount of ₹2,50,000/- has been placed on record. Learned counsel for respondent No.1/complainant, under instructions, submits that the matter has been reconciled between the parties and he has no objection in case the present application is allowed. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2. The record shows that the petitioner/accused was convicted and sentenced by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court Dalhousie, District Chamba, H.P. (learned Trial Court) in Criminal complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act Registration No. 44 of 2020 titled Arun Dogra versus Rangeen Kumar vide judgment dated 28.03.2022 and order of sentence dated 11.04.2022. The petitioner/accused unsuccessfully challenged his conviction and sentence before learned Sessions Judge, Chmaba, Division Chamba, H.P. (learned Appellate Court) in Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 2022 titled Rangeen Kumar vs. Arun Dogra and before this Court in Cr. Revision No. 707 of 2022 titled Rangeen Kumar versus Arun Dogra and another. 3. The Division Bench of this Court held in Chune Ram vs. Brikam Chand, 2025:HHC:38122 decided on 13.11.2025 that the Court can quash the conviction even after its finalization in criminal revision based on the compromise effected between the parties. This judgment is binding upon this Court. 4. In view of this judgment, the present application is allowed and the conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Trial Court as affirmed by learned Appellate Court and by this 3 Court in Cr. Revision No. 707 of 2022 titled Rangeen Kumar vs. Arun Dogra & another, decided on 25.08.2025 are ordered to be quashed. 5. It has been submitted that ₹1,00,000/- has been deposited in the Court of learned Trial Court which are to be disbursed to the complainant in terms of the compromise. Let the amount of ₹1,00,000/- deposited in the Court of learned Trial Court are ordered to be disbursed to the respondent No.1/complainant by remitting the same to his savings bank account on furnishing of the bank account details, if not furnished earlier. 6. In view of the above, the present application is disposed of. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 10th March, 2026 (ravinder)