IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. 1278 of 2025 Date of Decision: 9.1.2026. Ram Chand ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate. For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Prashant Sen, Deputy Advocate General. For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Shakti Bhardwaj, Advocate. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (Oral) A receipt of ₹18,000/- being the 15% of the cheque amount of ₹1,20,000/- has been filed which is taken on record. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant, under instructions, submits that the matter has been reconciled between the parties and he has no objection in case the present petition is allowed. 2. The record shows that the petitioner/accused was convicted and sentenced by learned Special Judge Magistrate 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 Kullu, H.P. in Criminal complaint No. 672-1 of 2013 titled Narayan Sharma versus Ram Chand vide judgment and order dated 25.03.2015. The petitioner/accused unsuccessfully challenged his conviction and sentence before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu in Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 2015 titled Ram Chand vs Narayan Sharma and before this Court in Cr. Revision No. 423 of 2015 titled Ram Chand versus Narayan Sharma. 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 petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, Kullu in Cr. Complaint No. 672-1 of 2013 as affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 2015, titled Ram Chand Vs. Narayan Sharma and by this Court in Cr. Revision No. 423 of 2015 titled Ram Chand versus Narayan Sharma, decided on 28.08.2025 are ordered to be quashed. 3 5. It has been submitted that an amount of ₹50,000/- has been deposited before learned Additional Sessions Judge Kullu and ₹50,000/- before this Court which are to be disbursed to Ram Chand (petitioner/accused) as per the compromise effected between the parties. 6. In view of this, an amount of ₹50,000/- deposited before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, H.P. and ₹50,000/- deposited before this Court are ordered to be remitted to the account of petitioner/accused Ram Chand on furnishing of bank details, if not furnished earlier. 7. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 9th January, 2026 (Nikita)