2025:HHC:42893 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Revision No.  : 689 of 2025 Decided on    : 09.12.2025 Deepak Sharma …Petitioner Versus M/s Shakun Chit Fund and Leasing Ltd. …Respondent The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Petitioner Deepak Sharma produced in the custody of LHC Yogesh Kumar No. 532 and C. Surender Mohan No. 599   of   Police   Line   Solan,   District Solan, H.P. Mr. P.S.   Goverdhan,   Senior Advocate,   assisted   by   Mr. Rakesh Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner. For the respondent : Sh. Sanjeev   Sharma,   Manager   of respondent,   in   person   with   Mr. Anirudh R.H. Sharma, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge (oral) Petitioner   –   Deepak   Sharma   has   filed   the present   Criminal   Revision   against   the   judgment   dated 17.05.2025,   passed   by   the   Court   of   learned   Additional Sessions Judge­II, Solan, District Solan, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2024, titled as ‘Deepak Sharma Vs M/s Shakun Chit Fund and Leasing Ltd.’. 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:42893 2. By   way   of   judgment   dated   17.05.2025,   the learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction, dated 18.01.2024   and   order   of   sentence   dated   30.03.2024, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1 Solan, District Solan, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’), in Comp. under N.I. Act No. 75­5/3   of   2018,   titled   as   ‘M/s   Shakun   Chit   Fund   and Leasing Ltd. Vs Deepak Sharma’. 3. Vide judgment of conviction, dated 18.01.2024 and   order   of   sentence,   dated   30.03.2024,   learned   trial Court   has   convicted   the   petitioner,   for   the   offence, punishable   under   Section   138   of   the   Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NI Act’) and sentenced   him   to   undergo   simple   imprisonment,   for   a period of six months and to pay a fine/compensation of Rs. 1,24,116/­ to the complainant. 4. After   dismissal   of   the   appeal   by   the   learned Appellate Court, the present Criminal Revision has been preferred. 5. During the pendency of the present petition, the parties have settled the matter. Thereafter, the petitioner 3 2025:HHC:42893 has filed application bearing Cr.MP No. 5444 of 2025, for permitting   the  parties  to   compound  the  offence,  on  the ground that the matter has been settled between them. 6. Statements   of   the   petitioner,   as   well   as,   Sh. Sanjeev   Sharma   (Manager   of   respondent­complainant), have been recorded, in which, they both have deposed that the   dispute   with   regard   to   Cheque   No.   113349,   dated 19.06.2018, has been settled between the parties. 7. Today, the accused (petitioner) is present before this Court. He has deposed that he has been convicted and sentenced   by   the   learned   trial   Court   vide   judgment   of conviction, dated 18.01.2024 and order of sentence, dated 30.03.2024. 8. Against   the   said   judgment   of   conviction   and order of sentence, the petitioner had filed the appeal before the   learned   Appellate   Court   and   the   learned   Appellate Court has dismissed his appeal. Now, he is before this Court, by way of the present Criminal Revision. 9. In addition to this, the accused (petitioner) has also submitted that during the pendency of the Criminal Revision, the matter has been compromised between him and the complainant. The settled amount has been paid 4 2025:HHC:42893 and now nothing is due against him regarding cheque No. 113349. He   has   no   objection,   in   case,   the   amount deposited by him, is ordered to be released in favour of the respondent­complainant. 10. The  petitioner­accused  has  also deposed that on the basis of the said compromise, the present petition may kindly be allowed by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, referred to above, and he may kindly be acquitted from the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act. 11. Sh. Sanjeev  Sharma,   Manager   of  respondent­ complainant, has also made the similar statement. He has deposed that the respondent, has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner­accused is acquitted   by   setting   aside   the   judgment   of   conviction, dated 18.01.2024 and order of sentence, dated 30.03.2024. He has also deposed that the amount of compensation, deposited by the petitioner­accused, before the learned trial Court, be released in favour of respondent­complainant. Rest of the settled amount, is stated to have already been received by the complainant. Now, nothing is due against him with regard to cheque No. 113349. 5 2025:HHC:42893 12. Learned   Senior   Counsel   for   the   petitioner­ accused   has   submitted   that   the   petitioner­accused   has deposited a sum of Rs. 24,823/­, before the learned trial Court. His statement is taken on record. 13. On the basis of the statements of the parties, one thing is clear that the matter has been settled between the   parties   and   in   pursuance   of   the   said   settlement, complainant   has   received   the   remaining   amount   of compensation from the petitioner. 14. According to the respondent­complainant, the dispute   with   regard   to   Cheque   No.   113349   dated 19.06.2018, has been settled between the parties. 15. Since,   the   matter,   with   regard   to   cheque,   in question, has been settled between the parties, as such, the application, bearing Cr.MP No. 5444 of 2025, is allowed and the parties are permitted to compound the offence. 16. Considering   the   fact   that   the   application   for compounding of the offence has been allowed, the present petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction, dated 18.01.2024   and   order   of   sentence   dated   30.03.2024, passed by learned trial Court in Criminal Comp. No. 75­ 5/3 of 2018, which has been affirmed by learned Appellate 6 2025:HHC:42893 Court, in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2024, vide judgment dated   17.05.2025,   are   set   aside   and   the   petitioner   is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 NI Act. His personal and surety bonds are discharged. 17. However, this order shall be subject to deposit of 7.5% of the cheque amount, as compounding fee, within eight weeks from today. 50% of the compounding fee be deposited   with   the   Member   Secretary,   H.P.   State   Legal Services Authority, Shimla, and remaining 50% with the H.P. High Court Staff Welfare Organization, Shimla. 18. Since, petitioner­accused is in judicial custody, as such, he is ordered to be released, if not required in any other case. 19. It is further clarified that if the petitioner fails to deposit the compounding fee, as ordered by this Court, within   eight   weeks,   then,   the   present   petition   shall   be deemed to have been dismissed, by reviving the judgment of   conviction,   dated   18.01.2024   and   order   of   sentence, dated 30.03.2024, passed by learned trial Court and in that eventuality, he shall surrender before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive sentence, imposed upon him, by the learned trial Court. 7 2025:HHC:42893 20. The   amount   Rs. 24,823/­   deposited   by   the petitioner­accused before the learned trial Court, is ordered to be released in favour of the respondent­complainant. 21. Pending   miscellaneous   applications,   if   any, shall also stand disposed of. (Virender Singh) Judge 09th December, 2025 (Pramod Kumar)