( 2025:HHC:33880 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Revision No. 523 of 2025 Date of Decision: 6.10.2025. Jitender Singh ...Petitioner Versus Deepak Kumar and another ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Suraj Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge A receipt issued by H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti, Shimla, H.P. has been filed which shows that an amount of ₹30,000/- being the 15% of the cheque amount of ₹2.00 lacs was deposited before the authority today. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.1, under instructions from the respondent/complainant, who is present in the Court, submits that the matter has been reconciled between 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 the parties and the respondent/complainant has received whole of the amount and he does not want to proceed further with the complaint filed by him after the receipt of the amount from the petitioner/accused and he wants to withdraw the complaint so filed by him. 3. In view of the aforesaid statement, the present revision is allowed and the judgment and order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No.5 of 2025, titled Jitender Singh Vs. Deepak Kumar, affirming the judgment passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P on 06.1.2025, in Criminal Case No. 163 of 2020, titled Deepak Kumar Vs. Jitender Singh are ordered to be set aside. 4. Hence, the complaint is dismissed as withdrawn as having been compromised. 5. It is stated that an amount of ₹60,000/- has been deposited in the Registry of this Court and according to the compromise, the amount is to be refunded to the complainant. This submission is acceptable to the complainant. 3 6. In view of this, the amount of ₹60,000/- deposited before the Registry is ordered to be refunded to the respondent/complainant on furnishing of the bank details, if not furnished earlier by remitting it his bank account. 7. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 6th October, 2025 (Nikita)