Raj Kumar Vs Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank & Anr. Cr. MP Nos. 5141 & 5150 of 2025 in Cr. Revision No. 518 of 2025 22.11.2025 Present: Mr. Bodh Raj Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional A.G. and Ms. Ranjana Patial, Deputy A.G. for respondent No. 2. Cr. MP No. 5141 of 2025 Due to some technical defect, learned Counsel for the petitioner does not want to press the present application. Consequently, the application is dismissed, being not pressed. Cr. MP No. 5150 of 2025 2. By way of present application, a prayer has been made to condone the delay in depositing the compounding fees, as directed by this Court, vide judgment dated 10.09.2025, passed in Criminal Revision No. 518 of 2025. 3. Brief facts, leading to the filing of the present application, may be summoned up as under:- 3.1 The complainant Himachal Gramin Bank, Branch Bhanjraru, has filed the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act), against the applicant-accused Raj Kumar, in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tissa, District Chamba, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as “the trial Court”) In the said complaint, Court of learned trial Court, vide judgment dated 11.06.2024, has convicted the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act and vide order of sentence dated 09.07.2024, he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay compensation of Rs. 1,30,000/-. 3.2 Against the said judgment of conviction dated 11.06.2024 and order of sentence dated 09.07.2024, the accused-applicant preferred the appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., however, the appeal was dismissed on 06.03.2025. Thereafter, the Criminal Revision No. 518 of 2025 was filed before this Court. The same was allowed, vide judgment dated 10.09.2025, in view of the compromise between the parties. While accepting the application for compounding, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court, as upheld by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., have been set aside and accused has been ordered to be acquitted from the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act, subject to the condition that he will deposit 5% of the cheque amount as compounding fees, within eight weeks, from the date of the judgment i.e. September 10, 2025, with the stipulation that in case of failure, the applicant will surrender before the learned trial Court, to undergo the substantive sentence. 4. Now, as per the application, a prayer has been made that although, the compounding fees has been deposited, however, the same could not be deposited within the stipulated period. 5. Admittedly, the applicant-accused has not moved the application for extension of time, but considering the fact that the compounding fees stood deposited, this Court is of the view that the prayer, so made, in the application deserves to be allowed and same is accordingly allowed. The delay in depositing the compounding fees of 5%, as per judgment dated 10.09.2025, is ordered to be condoned and compounding fees is deemed to have been deposited within time limit granted by this Court. As such, the compliance of the judgment dated 10.09.2025, has been made. Consequently, the learned trial Court is directed to proceed further. 6. The applicant is stated to be in judicial custody, who is undergoing sentence, in the present case, i.e. Comp. U/s 138 NI Act No. 100/2019, titled as ‘Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank Vs Raj Kumar, vide judgment of conviction dated 11.06.2024 and order of sentence dated 09.07.2024, is ordered to be released forthwith, if not required, in any other case. Application stands disposed of. ( Virender Singh ) Judge 22nd November, 2025 (Pramod) PRADEEP Digitally signed by PRADEEP Date: 2025.11.22 16:56:13 +0530