IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Revision No.621 of 2025 Date of Decision: 19.06.2026 __________________________________________________________________________ Raman Kumari ……...Petitioner Versus Kishori Lal …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Sat Parkash, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vinod Kumar & Mr. Rahul Chauhan, Advocate. _________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition filed under Section 438 read with Section 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, lays challenge to judgment dated 11.09.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No.20 of 2025, affirming the judgment of conviction dated 22.02.2025 and order of sentence dated 28.02.2025, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dalhousie, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, in Cr. Complaint No.41 of 2020, whereby learned trial Court, while holding the petitioner- accused (hereinafter, ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, (for short ‘Act’) convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay fine to the tune of Rs.5,90,000/- to the respondent-complainant (hereinafter, ‘complainant’). 2. Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the pleadings as well as other material adduced on record are that complainant filed a 2 complaint under Section 138 of the Act in the competent court of law, alleging therein that accused with a view to discharge his lawful liability issued four cheques i.e. cheque bearing No.057234 dated 31.12.2019 amounting to Rs.1,50,000/-, cheque bearing No.057235 dated 31.12.2019 amounting to Rs.1,50,000/-, cheque bearing No.057236 dated 31.12.2019 amounting to Rs.1,50,000/- and cheque bearing No.057239 dated 31.12.2019 amounting to Rs.50,000/- in favour of the complainant, however, the same were dishonoured on account of insufficient funds in the bank account of the accused. Since accused failed to make the payment good within the time stipulated in the legal notice, complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Act before the competent Court of law. 3. Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment/ order dated 22.02.2025/28.02.2025, held the accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as per the description given hereinabove. 4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction recorded by the learned Court below, accused preferred an appeal in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, which also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 11.09.2025, as a consequence of which, judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, accused has approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, seeking 3 therein for his acquittal after setting aside the judgments of conviction recorded by the courts below. 5. Before case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merit, parties have entered into compromise, whereby they have resolved to settle the dispute amicably inter se them. 6. Today during proceedings of the case, learned counsel for the accused, on instructions, states before this Court that accused has paid sum of Rs.2,18,000/- to the complainant in cash and sum of Rs.3,72,000/- is lying deposited with the learned trial Court. He states that on account of aforesaid amicable settlement arrived inter se parties, this Court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, may proceed to compound the offence and acquit the accused from the charges framed against him. 7. Mr. Vinod Tomar, Advocate, while putting in appearance on behalf of complainant, states that he has instructions to depose on behalf of the complainant. He states that parties have compromised the matter amicably, whereby complainant has already received sum of Rs.2,18,000/- in cash and in case sum of Rs.3,72,000/- lying deposited with the learned trial Court is ordered to be released in favour of the complainant, complainant shall have no objection in compounding the offence. His statement is taken on record. 8. Since parties have resolved to settle the dispute amicably inter se them, as has been taken note hereinabove, coupled with the fact that complainant has no objection in compounding the offence, in the event of his being released the amount lying deposited with the learned trial Court, 4 this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the accused for compounding the offence, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act as well as in terms of guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663, wherein it has been categorically held that court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence even after recording of conviction by the courts below. 9. Consequently, in view of the discussion made hereinabove as well as law taken into consideration, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction dated 11.09.2025 & 22.02.2025 and order of sentence dated 28.02.2025, passed by the learned Courts below are quashed and set-aside and the accused is acquitted of the charge framed against him under Section 138 of the Act. Interim order, if any, is vacated. Bail bonds, if any, discharged. The petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any. 10. Sum of Rs.3,72,000/- deposited by the accused with the learned trial Court is ordered to be released in favour of complainant by remitting the same in his saving bank account, detail whereof, shall be furnished within a period of one week. 11. Since complainant was compelled to engage in unwarranted litigation with the accused for realization of his own amount, accused is directed to deposit Rs.5,000/- with the HP State Legal Service Authority as compounding fee and Rs.5,000/- as litigation charges payable to the complainant within a period of eight weeks from today, failing which, she 5 shall render herself liable for penal consequences as well as contempt of court. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge June 19, 2026 (sunil)