[2025:RJ-JP:50481] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1561/2025 Shishupal Singh S/o Shri Ramhet Singh, R/o House No. 1/885, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Sameena Devi W/o Shri Shiv Charan Chandel, R/o Village Post Guhana, Tehsil Deeg, District Bharatpur, Presently Residing At Plot No. A-113, Tapovan Vihar, Near C.b.i. Phatak, Jagatpura, Jaipur. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Saini, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, Dy. GA Mr. Surendra Kumar Patodia, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 15/12/2025 1. Defect pointed out by the Registry is overruled. 2. This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 26.05.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan-First (for short ‘the Appellate Court’), whereby appeal filed by him against the judgment and order dated 30.05.2023 passed by Pilot Study Special Judicial Metropolitan Magistrate (N.I. Act Case), Jaipur Metropolitan-First (for short ‘the trial Court’) has been dismissed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that trial Court, while convicting the petitioner under Section 138 of N.I. Act, has sentenced him for simple imprisonment of 2 years along [2025:RJ-JP:50481] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1561/2025] with monetary fine of Rs.9 lacs out of which Rs.8.5 lacs were to be given to the complainant. 4. Learned counsel submits that the Appellate Court modified the sentence and it was reduced from two years of simple imprisonment to one year of simple imprisonment and the amount of fine was also reduced from Rs.9 lacs to Rs.7 lacs out of which Rs.6.5 lacs were to be given to the complainant. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after decision of appeal, the petitioner has entered into compromise with the complainant and the amount of Rs.6.5 lacs payable to the complainant has already been paid by the petitioner. 6. He further submits that in compliance of order dated 04.12.2025 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, both the parties were present before the Registrar (Judicial), where the compromise has been verified and attested in the presence of parties along with their counsels. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of judgment of Gian Chand Garg Vs. Harpal Singh & Anr. decided on 11.08.2025 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.8050/2025, where after considering earlier judgments, it has been held that by virtue of Section 147 of the N.I. Act, offence is compoundable in nature, notwithstanding the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure; hence, the same can be compounded at any stage of proceedings specially when the parties have themselves arrived at a voluntary compromise. 8. Learned counsel for the complainant has not disputed the fact that the compromise has taken place and has also [2025:RJ-JP:50481] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1561/2025] admitted that the complainant has received the amount pursuant to settlement. 9. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the Criminal Revision Petition. 10. In the light of above where the dispute was only with regard to dishonour of cheque, and the amount as directed by the Appellate Court has been paid by the petitioner to the complainant after entering into compromise with him and in the light of judgment of Gian Chand Garg (Supra), the present revision petition deserves to be allowed. 11. The Criminal Revision Petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The judgment dated 26.05.2025 passed by the Appellate Court as well as Judgment dated 30.05.2023 passed by the trial Court are quashed in view of compromise. Bail bonds, if any, submitted by the petitioner shall stand discharged. 12. The Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application stands disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J Jatin /58