IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Revision No. 727 of 2025 Date of Decision: 11.08.2026 __________________________________________________________________________ Kirpa Ram ……...Petitioner Versus Ravinder Kumar …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Prakash Chand Rachaik, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Sunil Chauhan, Advocate. _________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 438 read with Section 442 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, lays challenge to judgment dated 12.11.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No.149-S/10 of 2024, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 01.10.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chopal, District Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Complaint No.156 of 2021, whereby learned Court below, 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 compensation to the tune of Rs.6,00,000/- to the respondent-complainant (hereinafter ‘complainant). 2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Act in the 2 competent Court of law, alleging therein that accused, with a view to discharge his lawful liability, issued cheque bearing No.000161 dated 18.11.2021 amounting to Rs.5,00,000/- in favour of the complainant, however, the same was dishonoured with remarks “Funds insufficient”. 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 01.10.2024, 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 the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 12.11.2025, 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, praying 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. 3 6. Today during proceedings of the case, learned counsel for the accused, states that accused is ready and willing to make payment of entire compensation amount awarded by the learned Court below. He states that since complainant has already received the entire compensation amount from the accused, this Court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, may proceed to compound the offence and acquit the accused from the charge framed against him. 7. Mr. Sunil Chauhan, Advocate, while putting in appearance on behalf of the complainant, states that parties have compromised the matter amicably. He states that since complainant has already received the entire compensation amount from the accused, 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, 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 and sentence dated 4 12.11.2025 and 01.10.2024, 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 along with pending applications, if any. 10. 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.10,000/- as litigation charges payable to the complainant within a period of six weeks, failing which, he shall render himself liable for penal consequences as well as contempt of court. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge August 11, 2026 (sunil)