CRR-1029-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 121+231 Bhola Singh Harpreet Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. CRM-21362 of the fact that the parties have amicably settled their dispute. main revision petition, the application is disposed o which is also listed today, be taken up. 2. CRR-1029 of conviction by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, complaint bearing Singh, filed under Section 138 Instruments Act, guilty for commission of offence punishable under 2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Bhola Singh Versus Harpreet Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Ms. Prabhjot Kaur, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner. Mr. Rajeshwar Singh, Advocate and Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocate for the respondent. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 21362-2025 Prayer in this application is for compounding the offence in view of the fact that the parties have amicably settled their dispute. Since the prayer made in this application has direct bearing on the main revision petition, the application is disposed o which is also listed today, be taken up. 1029-2025 (O&M) The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence, both dated by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, complaint bearing No. COMA/114/2015, titled as , filed under Section 138 read with Section 142 Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘N. I. Act’) guilty for commission of offence punishable under -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-1029-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 02.07.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Rajeshwar Singh, Advocate and Prayer in this application is for compounding the offence in view of the fact that the parties have amicably settled their dispute. Since the prayer made in this application has direct bearing on the main revision petition, the application is disposed of and let the main case, petition has been filed against the judgment and order on quantum of sentence, both dated 18.09.2019, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Talwandi Sabo , titled as Harpreet Singh vs. Bhola read with Section 142 of the Negotiable ‘N. I. Act’), whereby the petitioner was held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N. I. Act 02.07.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent Prayer in this application is for compounding the offence in view Since the prayer made in this application has direct bearing on the f and let the main case, petition has been filed against the judgment passed Talwandi Sabo in Harpreet Singh vs. Bhola of the Negotiable held Section 138 of the N. I. Act MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.03 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1029-2025 and was sentenced to undergo and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/ cheque amount along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of judgment. The petitioner has also laid challenge to 01.03.2025, Bathinda, whereby 3. revision petition are that the petitioner dated 13.01.2015 discharge of his legal liability honoured on presentation but it dishonoured due to ‘insufficient funds’. He was served with a legal notice dated within the time stipulated. Aggrieved from the same, aforesaid complaint under Section 138 of N. I. Act, in which, the petitioner was held guilty and sentence by the learned appellate Court. Hence, the present revision petition. 4. CRM-21362 guilty and convicted. petitioner was suspended keeping in view the fact that the matter stands compromised between the parties. 5. settlement respondent/complainant respondent. been given by the petitioner to the respondent. It is submitted that r 2025 (O&M) sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for fine of Rs. 2,000/- and also to pay cheque amount along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of The petitioner has also laid challenge to , passed by the Court of learned whereby the appeal of the petitioner Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this etition are that the petitioner had issued a cheque bearing No. 456492 dated 13.01.2015 for Rs. 3,90,000/- in favour of the respondent/complainant in discharge of his legal liability with an assurance that the same would be honoured on presentation but it dishonoured due to ‘insufficient funds’. He was served with a legal notice dated 03.03.2015 within the time stipulated. Aggrieved from the same, aforesaid complaint under Section 138 of N. I. Act, in which, the petitioner was held guilty and sentenced as mentioned above. His appeal too by the learned appellate Court. Hence, the present revision petition. Now the petitioner has filed aforesaid application bearing number 21362-2025 for compounding the offence for which he has been held guilty and convicted. Vide order dated 15.05.2025, the sentence of the petitioner was suspended keeping in view the fact that the matter stands compromised between the parties. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the respondent/complainant, vide affidavit dated 30.04.2025, sworn by In pursuance of the said settlement, t been given by the petitioner to the respondent. It is submitted that r -2- imprisonment for a period of 02 years and also to pay compensation to the tune of the cheque amount along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of The petitioner has also laid challenge to the judgment dated passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, petitioner had been dismissed. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this had issued a cheque bearing No. 456492 in favour of the respondent/complainant in an assurance that the same would be honoured on presentation but it dishonoured due to ‘insufficient funds’. He was 2015 but he failed to make payment within the time stipulated. Aggrieved from the same, the complainant filed the aforesaid complaint under Section 138 of N. I. Act, in which, the petitioner was as mentioned above. His appeal too was dismissed by the learned appellate Court. Hence, the present revision petition. Now the petitioner has filed aforesaid application bearing number compounding the offence for which he has been held Vide order dated 15.05.2025, the sentence of the petitioner was suspended keeping in view the fact that the matter stands unsel for the petitioner that an amicable at between the petitioner and vit dated 30.04.2025, sworn by In pursuance of the said settlement, the entire disputed amount has been given by the petitioner to the respondent. It is submitted that respondent 02 years compensation to the tune of the cheque amount along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the judgment dated Sessions Judge, Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this had issued a cheque bearing No. 456492 in favour of the respondent/complainant in an assurance that the same would be honoured on presentation but it dishonoured due to ‘insufficient funds’. He was but he failed to make payment filed the aforesaid complaint under Section 138 of N. I. Act, in which, the petitioner was was dismissed Now the petitioner has filed aforesaid application bearing number compounding the offence for which he has been held Vide order dated 15.05.2025, the sentence of the petitioner was suspended keeping in view the fact that the matter stands unsel for the petitioner that an amicable petitioner and the vit dated 30.04.2025, sworn by the he entire disputed amount has espondent MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.03 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1029-2025 also admits the factum of the above stated between the parties and about receipt of entire disputed amount and therefore, he deserves to be granted permission to compound the offence. 6. factum of receiving the entire disputed amount from the petitioner and has submitted that he has no objection if the offence is compounded the petitioner and the judgment of conviction and order of sentenc learned trial Court and affirmed by learned aside. 7. compoundable offences. It is well settled proposition of law by now that in view of the provisions contained under this Section read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C., a compromise arrived committed under even after conviction. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment dated 02.03.2022 pronounced by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Misc. (main) petition No. 107 of 2022 under titled as Hiranand Shastri Vs. Ram Rattan Thakur and another was observed that the judgment of conviction recorded under Section 138 of N I. Act can be recalled, in view of the specific provisions contained under Section 147 of the Act, which provide for compounding of offence allegedly committed under Section 138 of N down in the judgment dated 21.12.2021 in Devi Vs. Surinder Singh and another’ Court of Himachal Pradesh that the Court has ample powers under Section 147 of N.I. Act to compound the offence in those cases, where the accused already 2025 (O&M) also admits the factum of the above stated between the parties and about receipt of entire disputed amount and therefore, he deserves to be granted permission to compound the offence. Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant factum of receiving the entire disputed amount from the petitioner and has submitted that he has no objection if the offence is compounded the petitioner and the judgment of conviction and order of sentenc learned trial Court and affirmed by learned Section 147 of N. I. Act makes all offenc compoundable offences. It is well settled proposition of law by now that in view of the provisions contained under this Section read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C., a compromise arrived inter se parties can be accepted and the offence committed under Section 138 of N. I. Act, can be ordered to be compounded even after conviction. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment dated 02.03.2022 pronounced by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Misc. (main) petition No. 107 of 2022 under Hiranand Shastri Vs. Ram Rattan Thakur and another was observed that the judgment of conviction recorded under Section 138 of N Act can be recalled, in view of the specific provisions contained under 147 of the Act, which provide for compounding of offence allegedly committed under Section 138 of N.I. Act. Similar proposition of law was laid down in the judgment dated 21.12.2021 in Devi Vs. Surinder Singh and another’, whe Court of Himachal Pradesh that the Court has ample powers under Section 147 Act to compound the offence in those cases, where the accused already -3- also admits the factum of the above stated settlement having been arrived between the parties and about receipt of entire disputed amount and therefore, he deserves to be granted permission to compound the offence. spondent/complainant has affirmed factum of receiving the entire disputed amount from the petitioner and has submitted that he has no objection if the offence is compounded in favour of the petitioner and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by learned trial Court and affirmed by learned appellate Court are quashed and set Act makes all offences under this Act as compoundable offences. It is well settled proposition of law by now that in view of the provisions contained under this Section read with Section 320 of parties can be accepted and the offence Act, can be ordered to be compounded even after conviction. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment dated 02.03.2022 pronounced by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Misc. (main) petition No. 107 of 2022 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Hiranand Shastri Vs. Ram Rattan Thakur and another, wherein it was observed that the judgment of conviction recorded under Section 138 of N Act can be recalled, in view of the specific provisions contained under 147 of the Act, which provide for compounding of offence allegedly Act. Similar proposition of law was laid down in the judgment dated 21.12.2021 in CRM-M-No. 2499-2021 in Geeta , wherein it was observed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh that the Court has ample powers under Section 147 Act to compound the offence in those cases, where the accused already having been arrived between the parties and about receipt of entire disputed amount and therefore, affirmed the factum of receiving the entire disputed amount from the petitioner and has in favour of e recorded by ppellate Court are quashed and set Act as compoundable offences. It is well settled proposition of law by now that in view of the provisions contained under this Section read with Section 320 of parties can be accepted and the offence Act, can be ordered to be compounded even after conviction. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment dated 02.03.2022 pronounced by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Section 482 of Cr.P.C. , wherein it was observed that the judgment of conviction recorded under Section 138 of N. Act can be recalled, in view of the specific provisions contained under 147 of the Act, which provide for compounding of offence allegedly Act. Similar proposition of law was laid Geeta rein it was observed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh that the Court has ample powers under Section 147 Act to compound the offence in those cases, where the accused already MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.03 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1029-2025 stands convicted. Singh and another vs. State of Haryana and another, 2013 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 102 the conviction, if the parties have settled the dispute amicably and have decided to live in peace and harmony, this Court, in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., can compound the 8. (Criminal) 851, with regard to the proceedings conducted in connection with complaints filed under Section 138 of NI Act. It wa complainant lied primarily in recovering the money rather than seeing t drawer of the cheque in jail with cheque and it is compensatory aspect of the remedy which should be gi priority over the punitive aspect. and another (2024) 5 SCR 203 that keeping in mind that ‘compensatory aspect,’ of remedy shall have priority over the ‘punitive aspect’ under the N. 9. their dispute amicably been paid by the petitioner by learned counsel for no objection if the offence is compounded. arrived at between the parties appellate Court. There is no doubt that the petitioner and reached at a settlement 2025 (O&M) stands convicted. Reference can also be made to the authority cited a Singh and another vs. State of Haryana and another, 2013 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 102, wherein a Division Bench of this Court has held that even after the conviction, if the parties have settled the dispute amicably and have decided to live in peace and harmony, this Court, in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., can compound the offence. In Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed babalal H. 2010(2) RCR (Criminal) 851,, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had laid down several guidelines with regard to the proceedings conducted in connection with complaints filed under Section 138 of NI Act. It was observed that the interest of the complainant lied primarily in recovering the money rather than seeing t drawer of the cheque in jail with respect to the offence of dishono cheque and it is compensatory aspect of the remedy which should be gi priority over the punitive aspect. In Raj Reddy Kallen Vs. State of Haryana and another (2024) 5 SCR 203, it was observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court that keeping in mind that ‘compensatory aspect,’ of remedy shall have priority over the ‘punitive aspect’, courts should encourage compounding of offences .I. Act, if the parties are willing to do so. In the instant case, as discussed above, the parties have their dispute amicably, in pursuance of which, been paid by the petitioner to the respondent by learned counsel for the respondent. He has stated that the complainant has no objection if the offence is compounded. arrived at between the parties after passing of judgment by the ppellate Court. There is no doubt that the petitioner and reached at a settlement permissible by law. This Court has also satisfied itself -4- Reference can also be made to the authority cited as Sube Singh and another vs. State of Haryana and another, 2013 (4) R.C.R. , wherein a Division Bench of this Court has held that even after the conviction, if the parties have settled the dispute amicably and have decided to live in peace and harmony, this Court, in exercise of powers under offence. Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed babalal H. 2010(2) RCR , the Hon’ble Supreme Court had laid down several guidelines with regard to the proceedings conducted in connection with complaints filed s observed that the interest of the complainant lied primarily in recovering the money rather than seeing t respect to the offence of dishonour of the cheque and it is compensatory aspect of the remedy which should be gi Raj Reddy Kallen Vs. State of Haryana , it was observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court that keeping in mind that ‘compensatory aspect,’ of remedy shall have priority , courts should encourage compounding of offences Act, if the parties are willing to do so. In the instant case, as discussed above, the parties have settl in pursuance of which, the entire disputed amount the respondent/complainant. This fact is affirmed respondent. He has stated that the complainant has no objection if the offence is compounded. This amicable settlement has after passing of judgment by the learned ppellate Court. There is no doubt that the petitioner and the respondent have by law. This Court has also satisfied itself Sube Singh and another vs. State of Haryana and another, 2013 (4) R.C.R. , wherein a Division Bench of this Court has held that even after the conviction, if the parties have settled the dispute amicably and have decided to live in peace and harmony, this Court, in exercise of powers under Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed babalal H. 2010(2) RCR , the Hon’ble Supreme Court had laid down several guidelines with regard to the proceedings conducted in connection with complaints filed s observed that the interest of the complainant lied primarily in recovering the money rather than seeing the r of the cheque and it is compensatory aspect of the remedy which should be given Raj Reddy Kallen Vs. State of Haryana , it was observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court that keeping in mind that ‘compensatory aspect,’ of remedy shall have priority , courts should encourage compounding of offences settled the entire disputed amount has . This fact is affirmed respondent. He has stated that the complainant has amicable settlement has learned respondent have by law. This Court has also satisfied itself MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.03 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1029-2025 regarding the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court for recording of their statement in support of the compromise. In pursuance thereof, the parties had appeared bef statements. A report dated Court, wherein it is reported that the compromise arrived at between the parties is valid, genuine, voluntary and without such, in the considered opinion of this Court, the conviction of the petitioner would not serve any purpose and is required to be set aside. In the light of the judicial precedents as referred circumstances of the case, offence deserves to be compounded in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the quantum of sentenc Magistrate as well as the judgment dated appellate Court convicted stands compounded and the petitioner is acquit such compounding. 10. if any, is rendered infructuous. 11. compliance and necessary action. 02.07.2025 Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2025 (O&M) regarding the genuineness of the settlement parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court for recording of their statement in support of the compromise. In pursuance thereof, the parties had appeared before the learned trial Court and had got recorded their statements. A report dated 13.06.2025 has been received from the learned trial Court, wherein it is reported that the compromise arrived at between the parties is valid, genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence. such, in the considered opinion of this Court, the conviction of the petitioner would not serve any purpose and is required to be set aside. In the light of the judicial precedents as referred to above and the attendant circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the offence deserves to be compounded in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of quantum of sentence, both dated 18.09.2019, Magistrate as well as the judgment dated appellate Court are set aside. The offence for which the petitioner was convicted stands compounded and the petitioner is acquit such compounding. His bail/surety bonds be discharged accordingly. Since the main petition has been disposed of, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. Let a copy of this order be sent to learned trial Court for compliance and necessary action. Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -5- as vide order dated 26.05.2025, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court for recording of their statement in support of the compromise. In pursuance thereof, the parties ore the learned trial Court and had got recorded their has been received from the learned trial Court, wherein it is reported that the compromise arrived at between the parties any coercion or undue influence. such, in the considered opinion of this Court, the conviction of the petitioner would not serve any purpose and is required to be set aside. In the light of the to above and the attendant facts and this Court is of the considered opinion that the offence deserves to be compounded in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, judgment of conviction and order of 18.09.2019, passed by the learned trial Magistrate as well as the judgment dated 01.03.2025 passed by the learned are set aside. The offence for which the petitioner was convicted stands compounded and the petitioner is acquitted on account of His bail/surety bonds be discharged accordingly. Since the main petition has been disposed of, pending application, Let a copy of this order be sent to learned trial Court for (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No , the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court for recording of their statement in support of the compromise. In pursuance thereof, the parties ore the learned trial Court and had got recorded their has been received from the learned trial Court, wherein it is reported that the compromise arrived at between the parties any coercion or undue influence. As such, in the considered opinion of this Court, the conviction of the petitioner would not serve any purpose and is required to be set aside. In the light of the facts and this Court is of the considered opinion that the offence deserves to be compounded in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, judgment of conviction and order of passed by the learned trial by the learned are set aside. The offence for which the petitioner was ted on account of Since the main petition has been disposed of, pending application, Let a copy of this order be sent to learned trial Court for MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.03 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document