CRR-1509 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 255 Harbans Singh The Gidderbaha Primary Agriculture Development Bank Ltd. and another CORAM: Present: SUMEET GOEL 1. dated 25.02.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar also judgment Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Giddarbaha held guilty for committing Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. pendency of proceedings, the petitioner and the complainant entered into a settlement/compromise and the petitioner has already deposited the cheque amount with the bank, in respect has been being an uneducated person hailing from a rural background was under a bona fide belief that the matter stood concluded with the respondent and, thus, dis 1509-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Harbans Singh V/s The Gidderbaha Primary Agriculture Development Bank Ltd. and another CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. TPS Makkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naginder Singh Vashist, Advocate for respondent No.1-Bank. Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed impugning the dated 25.02.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar judgment and order of sentence dated 23.01.2020 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Giddarbaha held guilty for committing an offence punishable under Section Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that, during the pendency of proceedings, the petitioner and the complainant entered into a settlement/compromise and the petitioner has already deposited the cheque amount with the bank, in respect has been duly issued by the respondent being an uneducated person hailing from a rural background was under a bona fide belief that the matter stood concluded with the respondent and, thus, discontinued appearing before the appellate Court. According to 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-1509-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.08.202 ....Petitioner ....Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL TPS Makkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naginder Singh Vashist, Advocate Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ***** The present petition has been filed impugning the judgment dated 25.02.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib dated 23.01.2020 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Giddarbaha whereby the petitioner has been offence punishable under Section 138 of Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that, during the pendency of proceedings, the petitioner and the complainant-Bank have entered into a settlement/compromise and the petitioner has already deposited the cheque amount with the bank, in respect of which a certificate duly issued by the respondent-bank. Furthermore, the petitioner being an uneducated person hailing from a rural background was under a bona fide belief that the matter stood concluded with the respondent-Bank continued appearing before the appellate Court. According to 2025 (O&M) .2025 judgment Sahib as dated 23.01.2020 passed by the Sub hereby the petitioner has been 138 of Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that, during the Bank have entered into a settlement/compromise and the petitioner has already of which a certificate Furthermore, the petitioner being an uneducated person hailing from a rural background was under a Bank continued appearing before the appellate Court. According to AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1509 learned counsel, such conduct on the part of the petitioner account of or ulterior motive. parties have amicably settled their dispute(s), the matter may be compounded and the petitioner be acquitted. submissions, the grant of instant revision petition is entreated for. 3. petitioner not appearing before the learned Appellate Court, instant revision petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has failed to show any regard for the process of law, thereby, the learned appella dismissed the appeal preferred on behalf of the petitioner (herein). 4. ratified the factum of compromise/settlement having been arrived at between the parties and has further vouched dated 08.05.2025 issued by the bank Annexure respondent compounded and the petitioner is ordered to be acquitted. 5. perused the available record. 6. State counsel regarding maintainability of the instant revision petition, it would be apposite to refer herein to a Harcharan Singh vs. State of Punjab 05.08.2025, relevant whereof reads thus: 1509-2025 learned counsel, such conduct on the part of the petitioner account of a bona fide impression and not on account of any deliberate lapse or ulterior motive. Learned counsel has parties have amicably settled their dispute(s), the matter may be compounded and the petitioner be acquitted. submissions, the grant of instant revision petition is entreated for. Learned State counsel has submitted that on account of the petitioner not appearing before the learned Appellate Court, instant revision petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has failed to show any regard for the process of law, thereby, the learned appella dismissed the appeal preferred on behalf of the petitioner (herein). Learned counsel appearing for the complainant ratified the factum of compromise/settlement having been arrived at between the parties and has further vouched for dated 08.05.2025 issued by the bank (copy wh Annexure P-1 with the instant petition). Accordingly, he has iterated that the respondent-bank has no objection in case the offence is permitted to be compounded and the petitioner is ordered to be acquitted. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and have perused the available record. Dealing with the preliminary objection raised by the learned State counsel regarding maintainability of the instant revision petition, it would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by Harcharan Singh vs. State of Punjab passed in 05.08.2025, relevant whereof reads thus: 2 learned counsel, such conduct on the part of the petitioner has occasioned on a bona fide impression and not on account of any deliberate lapse has further submitted that since the parties have amicably settled their dispute(s), the matter may be compounded and the petitioner be acquitted. On the basis of aforesaid submissions, the grant of instant revision petition is entreated for. ate counsel has submitted that on account of the petitioner not appearing before the learned Appellate Court, instant revision petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has failed to show any regard for the process of law, thereby, the learned appellate Court has very rightly dismissed the appeal preferred on behalf of the petitioner (herein). Learned counsel appearing for the complainant-respondent has ratified the factum of compromise/settlement having been arrived at between for the genuineness of the certificate (copy whereof has been appended as 1 with the instant petition). Accordingly, he has iterated that the has no objection in case the offence is permitted to be compounded and the petitioner is ordered to be acquitted. arned counsel for the rival parties and have Dealing with the preliminary objection raised by the learned State counsel regarding maintainability of the instant revision petition, it judgment passed by this Court in passed in CRR-1704-2025 dated 05.08.2025, relevant whereof reads thus: has occasioned on a bona fide impression and not on account of any deliberate lapse since the parties have amicably settled their dispute(s), the matter may be On the basis of aforesaid ate counsel has submitted that on account of the petitioner not appearing before the learned Appellate Court, instant revision petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has failed to show any regard te Court has very rightly respondent has ratified the factum of compromise/settlement having been arrived at between certificate ereof has been appended as 1 with the instant petition). Accordingly, he has iterated that the has no objection in case the offence is permitted to be arned counsel for the rival parties and have Dealing with the preliminary objection raised by the learned State counsel regarding maintainability of the instant revision petition, it this Court in dated AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1509 maintainable, notwith appear before the learned Appellate Court. In view of the explanation furnished for non Court as well as the the rival parties, this Court deems it fit to further consider the instant revision petition. 7. judgment passed by a Three Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as relevant whereof reads thus: 1509-2025 “12. As a sequitur to the above ratiocination, the following postulates emerge: I. A criminal revision petition conviction (as also an application for suspension of sentence, etc.) is maintainable before this High Court, without the petitioner having surrendered or being in custody, in the absence of any rule in the extant Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules/Orders proscribing such maintainability. II (i) The mere maintainability of a revision petition (as also an accompanying application for suspension of sentence) does not, ipso facto, translate into its desirability; the latter is which is inexorably linked to the bona fides and overall conduct of the petitioner-accused, including the sufficiency of reasons proffered for non appearance before the Appellate Court. (ii) Where the conduct of the p evasion or contumacious disregard of process of law, the Court must lean against the grant of suspension of sentence, lest, it may tantamount to condoning inexplicable defiance of judicial process. (iii) No universal guidelines enumerated for exercise of this judicial discretion by this High Court while considering such an application for suspension of sentence. It is, thus, indubitable that the instant revision petition is maintainable, notwithstanding, the petitioner appear before the learned Appellate Court. In view of the explanation furnished for non-appearance of the petitioner before the learned Appellate Court as well as the factum of compromise having been arriv the rival parties, this Court deems it fit to further consider the instant revision petition. At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by a Three Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H., AIR 2010(SC) 1907, relevant whereof reads thus: 3 As a sequitur to the above ratiocination, the following A criminal revision petition against the judgments of conviction (as also an application for suspension of sentence, etc.) is maintainable before this High Court, without the petitioner-accused having surrendered or being in custody, in the absence of any rule in the Haryana High Court Rules/Orders proscribing such The mere maintainability of a revision petition (as also an accompanying application for suspension of sentence) does not, ipso facto, translate into its desirability; the latter is a matter of judicial discretion which is inexorably linked to the bona fides and overall conduct of the accused, including the sufficiency of reasons proffered for non appearance before the Appellate Court. Where the conduct of the petitioner-accused reflects evasion or contumacious disregard of process of law, the Court must lean against the grant of suspension of sentence, lest, it may tantamount to condoning inexplicable defiance of judicial process. No universal guidelines or parameters can possibly be enumerated for exercise of this judicial discretion by this High Court while considering such an application for suspension of sentence.” It is, thus, indubitable that the instant revision petition is standing, the petitioner-accused having omitted to appear before the learned Appellate Court. In view of the explanation appearance of the petitioner before the learned Appellate of compromise having been arrived at between the rival parties, this Court deems it fit to further consider the instant , it would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by a Three Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H., AIR 2010(SC) 1907, As a sequitur to the above ratiocination, the following against the judgments of conviction (as also an application for suspension of sentence, etc.) is accused having surrendered or being in custody, in the absence of any rule in the Haryana High Court Rules/Orders proscribing such The mere maintainability of a revision petition (as also an accompanying application for suspension of sentence) does not, ipso facto, a matter of judicial discretion –– which is inexorably linked to the bona fides and overall conduct of the accused, including the sufficiency of reasons proffered for non- accused reflects evasion or contumacious disregard of process of law, the Court must lean against the grant of suspension of sentence, lest, it may tantamount to or parameters can possibly be enumerated for exercise of this judicial discretion by this High Court while It is, thus, indubitable that the instant revision petition is accused having omitted to appear before the learned Appellate Court. In view of the explanation appearance of the petitioner before the learned Appellate ed at between the rival parties, this Court deems it fit to further consider the instant , it would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by a Three Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H., AIR 2010(SC) 1907, AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1509 1509-2025 “15. With regard to the progression of litigation in cheque bouncing cases, the learned Attorney General has urged this Court to frame guidelines for a graded scheme of im delay compounding of the offence. It was submitted that the requirement of deposit of the costs will act as a deterrent for delayed composition, since at present, free and easy compounding of offences at any stage, howeve belated, gives an incentive to the drawer of the cheque to delay settling the cases for years. An application for compounding made after several years not only results in the system being burdened but the complainant is also deprived of effective justice. In view of this submission, we direct that the following guidelines be followed:- THE GUIDELINES (i) In the circumstances, it is proposed as follows: (a) That directions can be given that the Writ of Summons be suitably modified making it clear to the an application for compounding of the offences at the first or second hearing of the case and that if such an application is made, compounding may be allowed by the court without imposing any costs on the accused. (b) If the accused does not make an application for compounding as aforesaid, then if an application for compounding is made before the Magistrate at a subsequent stage, compounding can be allowed subject to the condition that the accused will be required to pay 10% of the cheque amount to be deposited as a condition for compounding with the Legal Services Authority, or such authority as the Court deems fit. (c) Similarly, if the application for compounding is made before the Sessions Court or a High Court in revision compounding may be allowed on the condition that the accused pays 15% of the cheque amount by way of costs. (d) Finally, if the application for compounding is made before the Supreme Court, the figure would increase to 20% of the cheque amount. Let it also be clarified that any costs imposed in accordance with these guidelines should be deposited with the Legal Services Authority operating at the level of the Court before which compounding takes place. For instance, in case of compounding during before a Magistrate's Court or a Court of Sessions, such costs should be deposited with the District Legal Services Authority. Likewise, costs 4 15. With regard to the progression of litigation in cheque bouncing cases, the learned Attorney General has urged this Court to frame guidelines for a graded scheme of imposing costs on parties who unduly delay compounding of the offence. It was submitted that the requirement of deposit of the costs will act as a deterrent for delayed composition, since at present, free and easy compounding of offences at any stage, howeve belated, gives an incentive to the drawer of the cheque to delay settling the cases for years. An application for compounding made after several years not only results in the system being burdened but the complainant is also . In view of this submission, we direct that the - (i) In the circumstances, it is proposed as follows: (a) That directions can be given that the Writ of Summons be suitably modified making it clear to the accused that he could make an application for compounding of the offences at the first or second hearing of the case and that if such an application is made, compounding may be allowed by the court without imposing any cused does not make an application for compounding as aforesaid, then if an application for compounding is made before the Magistrate at a subsequent stage, compounding can be allowed subject to the condition that the accused will be required the cheque amount to be deposited as a condition for compounding with the Legal Services Authority, or such authority (c) Similarly, if the application for compounding is made before the Sessions Court or a High Court in revision or appeal, such compounding may be allowed on the condition that the accused pays 15% of the cheque amount by way of costs. (d) Finally, if the application for compounding is made before the Supreme Court, the figure would increase to 20% of the cheque Let it also be clarified that any costs imposed in accordance with these guidelines should be deposited with the Legal Services Authority operating at the level of the Court before which compounding takes place. For instance, in case of compounding during the pendency of proceedings before a Magistrate's Court or a Court of Sessions, such costs should be deposited with the District Legal Services Authority. Likewise, costs 15. With regard to the progression of litigation in cheque bouncing cases, the learned Attorney General has urged this Court to frame posing costs on parties who unduly delay compounding of the offence. It was submitted that the requirement of deposit of the costs will act as a deterrent for delayed composition, since at present, free and easy compounding of offences at any stage, however belated, gives an incentive to the drawer of the cheque to delay settling the cases for years. An application for compounding made after several years not only results in the system being burdened but the complainant is also . In view of this submission, we direct that the (a) That directions can be given that the Writ of Summons be accused that he could make an application for compounding of the offences at the first or second hearing of the case and that if such an application is made, compounding may be allowed by the court without imposing any cused does not make an application for compounding as aforesaid, then if an application for compounding is made before the Magistrate at a subsequent stage, compounding can be allowed subject to the condition that the accused will be required the cheque amount to be deposited as a condition for compounding with the Legal Services Authority, or such authority (c) Similarly, if the application for compounding is made before or appeal, such compounding may be allowed on the condition that the accused (d) Finally, if the application for compounding is made before the Supreme Court, the figure would increase to 20% of the cheque Let it also be clarified that any costs imposed in accordance with these guidelines should be deposited with the Legal Services Authority operating at the level of the Court before which compounding takes place. For the pendency of proceedings before a Magistrate's Court or a Court of Sessions, such costs should be deposited with the District Legal Services Authority. Likewise, costs AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1509 7.1. New Win Export & Law Herald (SC) 2098, 1509-2025 imposed in connection with composition before the High Court should be deposited with the State Legal Services Authority and those imposed in connection with composition before the Supreme Court should be deposited with the National Legal Services Authority. xxx xxx xxx xxx 17. We are also conscious of the v the above quoted guidelines could be seen as making and therefore an intrusion into the legislative domain. It must be kept in mind that Section 147 of the Act does not carry any guidance on how to proceed with the compounding of offences under the Act. We have already explained that the scheme contemplated under CrPC cannot be followed in the strict sense. In view of the vacuum, we see no hurdle to the endorsement of some suggestions which have been designed to discourage litigants from unduly delaying the composition of the offence in cases involving graded scheme for imposing costs is a means to encourage compounding at an early stage of litigation. In the status quo, valuable time of the is spent on the trial of these cases and t Court fee since the proceedings are governed Procedure, even though the impact of the offence is largely confined to the private parties. Even though the imposition of costs by t is a matter of discretion, the scale of costs has been suggested in the interest of uniformity. The competent Court can of course reduce the costs with regard to the specific facts and circumstances of a recording reasons in writing for such variance. Bona fide litigants should of course contest the proceedings to their logical end. Even in the past, this Court has used its power to do complete justice under the Constitution to frame guidelines in relation to subject there was a legislative vacuum.” Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a judgment titled as New Win Export & Anr. vs. A. Subramaniam 2024 INSC 535 : 2024(3) Law Herald (SC) 2098, relevant whereof reads as under: “6. At this juncture, we would also like to reiterate a few words regarding the principles of compounding of offences in the context of Act. It is to be remembered that dishonour of cheques offence which was made an offence only in view of public 5 imposed in connection with composition before the High Court should be the State Legal Services Authority and those imposed in connection with composition before the Supreme Court should be deposited with the National Legal Services Authority. xxx xxx xxx xxx We are also conscious of the view that the judicial endorsement of quoted guidelines could be seen as an act of judicial law therefore an intrusion into the legislative domain. It must be of the Act does not carry any guidance on how to proceed with the compounding of offences under the Act. We have already explained that the scheme contemplated under Section 320 of the followed in the strict sense. In view of the legislative vacuum, we see no hurdle to the endorsement of some suggestions which discourage litigants from unduly delaying the composition of the offence in cases involving Section 138 of the Act. The graded scheme for imposing costs is a means to encourage compounding at an early stage of litigation. In the status quo, valuable time of the Court is spent on the trial of these cases and the parties are not liable to pay any Court fee since the proceedings are governed by the Code of Criminal , even though the impact of the offence is largely confined to the hough the imposition of costs by the competent court is a matter of discretion, the scale of costs has been suggested in the interest of uniformity. The competent Court can of course reduce the costs the specific facts and circumstances of a case, while recording reasons in writing for such variance. Bona fide litigants should of course contest the proceedings to their logical end. Even in the past, this Court has used its power to do complete justice under Article 142 the Constitution to frame guidelines in relation to subject-matter where Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a judgment titled as M/s Anr. vs. A. Subramaniam 2024 INSC 535 : 2024(3) relevant whereof reads as under: would also like to reiterate a few words regarding the principles of compounding of offences in the context of . It is to be remembered that dishonour of cheques is a regulatory offence which was made an offence only in view of public interest so that imposed in connection with composition before the High Court should be the State Legal Services Authority and those imposed in connection with composition before the Supreme Court should be iew that the judicial endorsement of an act of judicial law- therefore an intrusion into the legislative domain. It must be of the Act does not carry any guidance on how to proceed with the compounding of offences under the Act. We have of the legislative vacuum, we see no hurdle to the endorsement of some suggestions which discourage litigants from unduly delaying the of the Act. The graded scheme for imposing costs is a means to encourage compounding Court he parties are not liable to pay any Code of Criminal , even though the impact of the offence is largely confined to the he competent court is a matter of discretion, the scale of costs has been suggested in the interest of uniformity. The competent Court can of course reduce the costs case, while recording reasons in writing for such variance. Bona fide litigants should of course contest the proceedings to their logical end. Even in the past, Article 142 of matter where M/s Anr. vs. A. Subramaniam 2024 INSC 535 : 2024(3) would also like to reiterate a few words regarding the principles of compounding of offences in the context of NI is a regulatory interest so that AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1509 7.2. Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 when examined alongwith Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 in the guiding light of the judgments of the Hon’ble Sup New Win Export under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 can be compounded anytime, irrespective of the reached the High Court been conclusively dealt with by the Magisterial as also the Sessions Court. In other words, such an offence can be compromised/compounded the petitioner and his appeal against the same has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Court. Prabhu case (supra) has also enunciated imposed when the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act of 1881 is compounded at a stage when substantial proceedings have been undertaken by Courts so as to dissuade the unscrupulous litigant from 1509-2025 the reliability of these instruments can be ensured. A large number of cases involving dishonour of cheques are pending before courts which is a serious concern for our judicial system. Keeping in mind that the ‘compensatory aspect’ of remedy shall have priority over the ‘punitive aspect’, courts should encourage compounding Act if parties are willing to do so. (See: Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663 Manoj Goel (2022) 11 SCC 705 Private Limited And Anr. v. Kancha 18.2)” The statutory provision of Section 359 of BNSS, 2023 and Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 when examined alongwith Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 in the guiding light of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of Damodar S. Prabhu New Win Export (supra), lead to the unequivocal conclusion that the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 can be compounded anytime, irrespective of the stage of litigation reached the High Court invoking the revisional jurisdiction, conclusively dealt with by the Magisterial as also the Sessions Court. In other words, such an offence can be compromised/compounded e petitioner-accused has been convicted by the Court of learned Magistrate and his appeal against the same has been dismissed by the learned Sessions The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment of case (supra) has also enunciated imposed when the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act of 1881 is compounded at a stage when substantial proceedings have been undertaken by Courts so as to dissuade the unscrupulous litigant from 6 the reliability of these instruments can be ensured. A large number of cases involving dishonour of cheques are pending before courts which is a serious concern for our judicial system. Keeping in mind that the ‘compensatory aspect’ of remedy shall have priority over the ‘punitive aspect’, courts should encourage compounding of offences under the if parties are willing to do so. (See: Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed 2010) 5 SCC 663 (Para 18), Gimpex Private Limited v. 2022) 11 SCC 705 (Para 29), Meters And Instruments Private Limited And Anr. v. Kanchan Mehta (2018) 1 SCC 560 (Para The statutory provision of Section 359 of BNSS, 2023 and Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 when examined alongwith Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 in the guiding light of the judgments of the Damodar S. Prabhu (supra) and M/s (supra), lead to the unequivocal conclusion that the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 can be compounded stage of litigation including when the matter has invoking the revisional jurisdiction, after having conclusively dealt with by the Magisterial as also the Sessions Court. In other words, such an offence can be compromised/compounded even after accused has been convicted by the Court of learned Magistrate and his appeal against the same has been dismissed by the learned Sessions The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment of Damodar S. case (supra) has also enunciated that, ordinarily, costs ought to be imposed when the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act of 1881 is compounded at a stage when substantial proceedings have been undertaken by Courts so as to dissuade the unscrupulous litigant from the reliability of these instruments can be ensured. A large number of cases involving dishonour of cheques are pending before courts which is a serious concern for our judicial system. Keeping in mind that the ‘compensatory aspect’ of remedy shall have priority over the ‘punitive of offences under the NI Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed , Gimpex Private Limited v. , Meters And Instruments (Para The statutory provision of Section 359 of BNSS, 2023 and Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 when examined alongwith Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 in the guiding light of the judgments of the M/s (supra), lead to the unequivocal conclusion that the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 can be compounded including when the matter has having conclusively dealt with by the Magisterial as also the Sessions Court. even after accused has been convicted by the Court of learned Magistrate and his appeal against the same has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Damodar S. that, ordinarily, costs ought to be imposed when the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act of 1881 is compounded at a stage when substantial proceedings have been undertaken by Courts so as to dissuade the unscrupulous litigant from AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1509 unduly delaying the compounding of such offences. However, discretion has been reserved in favour of the concerned Court to reduce/waive off such costs, in case facts/circumstances of a given case so warrant. 7.3. Section 528 BNSS, 2023 process and securing the ends of justice. Thus, when the dispute is essentially personal in nature and a genuine compromise has been reached, the High continued proceedings would be non circumstances. The inherent powers of a High Court are powers which are incidental replete powers, which if to sit still and helplessly abused for the purposes of injustice. In other words intrinsic to a High Court, it is its very life immanent attribute. Wit but lack substance. construed with the widest possible amplitude. These inherent powers are in consonance with the nature of a High Court which ought to be, fact been, invested with power(s) to maintain its authority to prevent the process of law/Courts being obstructed or abused. It is a trite posit of jurisprudence that though laws attempt to deal with all cases that may arise, the infinite variet limitations governing every furtherance of justice in an indefatigable manner, should th 1509-2025 ly delaying the compounding of such offences. However, discretion has been reserved in favour of the concerned Court to reduce/waive off such costs, in case facts/circumstances of a given case so warrant. Further, the inherent jurisdiction ection 528 BNSS, 2023 is primarily aimed at preventing abuse of judicial process and securing the ends of justice. Thus, when the dispute is essentially personal in nature and a genuine compromise has been reached, igh Court may intervene to quash the conviction recognizing the continued proceedings would be non-productive and unjust in the given circumstances. The inherent powers of a High Court are powers which are incidental replete powers, which if they did not exist, to sit still and helplessly watch the process of law and abused for the purposes of injustice. In other words intrinsic to a High Court, it is its very life immanent attribute. Without such power(s), a High Court would have form but lack substance. Hence, these powers of a High Court deserve to be construed with the widest possible amplitude. These inherent powers are in consonance with the nature of a High Court which ought to be, fact been, invested with power(s) to maintain its authority to prevent the process of law/Courts being obstructed or abused. It is a trite posit of jurisprudence that though laws attempt to deal with all cases that may arise, the infinite variety of circumstances which shape events and the limitations of language render it impracticable to formulate governing every possible scenario. A High Court which exists for the furtherance of justice in an indefatigable manner, should th 7 ly delaying the compounding of such offences. However, discretion has been reserved in favour of the concerned Court to reduce/waive off such costs, in case facts/circumstances of a given case so warrant. inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under is primarily aimed at preventing abuse of judicial process and securing the ends of justice. Thus, when the dispute is essentially personal in nature and a genuine compromise has been reached, ervene to quash the conviction recognizing the productive and unjust in the given circumstances. The inherent powers of a High Court are powers which are did not exist, would oblige the Court the process of law and the Courts being abused for the purposes of injustice. In other words, such power(s) is intrinsic to a High Court, it is its very life-blood, its very essence, its hout such power(s), a High Court would have form hese powers of a High Court deserve to be construed with the widest possible amplitude. These inherent powers are in consonance with the nature of a High Court which ought to be, and has in fact been, invested with power(s) to maintain its authority to prevent the process of law/Courts being obstructed or abused. It is a trite posit of jurisprudence that though laws attempt to deal with all cases that may arise, y of circumstances which shape events and the inherent render it impracticable to formulate provisions . A High Court which exists for the furtherance of justice in an indefatigable manner, should therefore, have ly delaying the compounding of such offences. However, discretion has been reserved in favour of the concerned Court to reduce/waive off such under is primarily aimed at preventing abuse of judicial process and securing the ends of justice. Thus, when the dispute is essentially personal in nature and a genuine compromise has been reached, ervene to quash the conviction recognizing the productive and unjust in the given circumstances. The inherent powers of a High Court are powers which are e the Court Courts being such power(s) is blood, its very essence, its hout such power(s), a High Court would have form hese powers of a High Court deserve to be construed with the widest possible amplitude. These inherent powers are in and has in fact been, invested with power(s) to maintain its authority to prevent the process of law/Courts being obstructed or abused. It is a trite posit of jurisprudence that though laws attempt to deal with all cases that may arise, inherent provisions . A High Court which exists for the erefore, have AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1509 unfettered power(s) to deal with situations which, though not expressly provided for by the law, need to be dealt with, to prevent injustice or the abuse of the process of law and Courts. The juridical basis of these plenary power(s) is the a High Court; to uphold, to protect and to fulfill the judicial function of administering justice, in accordance with law, in a regular, orderly and effective manner. In other words; Section 528 of B peerless powers, which a High Court may draw upon as necessary whenever it is just and equitable to do so, in particular to ensure the observance of the due process of law, to prevent vexation or oppression, to do justice nay substantial Therefore, the High Court, in the exercise of its inherent power under section 528 BNSS, 2023 has the discretion to quash a conviction where the parties have reached an amicable settlement, pr impinge upon the public interest or undermine justice, as well as the substantial justice. 8. the concerned rival parties that an amicable settlement has bee between them and, therefore, compounding of the offence and necessary further directions have been sought from this Court. compromise/settlement respondent reflects that the parties have the respondent The learned ASJ 1509-2025 unfettered power(s) to deal with situations which, though not expressly provided for by the law, need to be dealt with, to prevent injustice or the abuse of the process of law and Courts. The juridical basis of these plenary power(s) is the authority; in fact the seminal duty and responsibility of a High Court; to uphold, to protect and to fulfill the judicial function of administering justice, in accordance with law, in a regular, orderly and effective manner. In other words; Section 528 of B peerless powers, which a High Court may draw upon as necessary whenever it is just and equitable to do so, in particular to ensure the observance of the due process of law, to prevent vexation or oppression, to do justice nay substantial justice between the parties and to secure the ends of justice. Therefore, the High Court, in the exercise of its inherent power under section 528 BNSS, 2023 has the discretion to quash a conviction where the parties have reached an amicable settlement, pr impinge upon the public interest or undermine justice, as well as the substantial justice. Reverting to the facts of the case in hand, it is not disputed by the concerned rival parties that an amicable settlement has bee between them and, therefore, compounding of the offence and necessary further directions have been sought from this Court. compromise/settlement and the certificate which respondent-bank (copy whereof has been appended as Annexure reflects that the parties have amicably resolved the dispute and at present, the respondent-Bank does not harbor any grievance against the petitioner. learned ASJ, vide its judgment dated 25.02.2025, dismissed the appeal 8 unfettered power(s) to deal with situations which, though not expressly provided for by the law, need to be dealt with, to prevent injustice or the abuse of the process of law and Courts. The juridical basis of these plenary uthority; in fact the seminal duty and responsibility of a High Court; to uphold, to protect and to fulfill the judicial function of administering justice, in accordance with law, in a regular, orderly and effective manner. In other words; Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 reflects peerless powers, which a High Court may draw upon as necessary whenever it is just and equitable to do so, in particular to ensure the observance of the due process of law, to prevent vexation or oppression, to do justice nay justice between the parties and to secure the ends of justice. Therefore, the High Court, in the exercise of its inherent power under section 528 BNSS, 2023 has the discretion to quash a conviction where the parties have reached an amicable settlement, provided such compromise does not impinge upon the public interest or undermine justice, as well as the Reverting to the facts of the case in hand, it is not disputed by the concerned rival parties that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between them and, therefore, compounding of the offence and necessary further directions have been sought from this Court. In view of the and the certificate which was duly issued by the been appended as Annexure P amicably resolved the dispute and at present, Bank does not harbor any grievance against the petitioner. , vide its judgment dated 25.02.2025, dismissed the appeal unfettered power(s) to deal with situations which, though not expressly provided for by the law, need to be dealt with, to prevent injustice or the abuse of the process of law and Courts. The juridical basis of these plenary uthority; in fact the seminal duty and responsibility of a High Court; to uphold, to protect and to fulfill the judicial function of administering justice, in accordance with law, in a regular, orderly and NSS, 2023 reflects peerless powers, which a High Court may draw upon as necessary whenever it is just and equitable to do so, in particular to ensure the observance of the due process of law, to prevent vexation or oppression, to do justice nay justice between the parties and to secure the ends of justice. Therefore, the High Court, in the exercise of its inherent power under section 528 BNSS, 2023 has the discretion to quash a conviction where the parties ovided such compromise does not impinge upon the public interest or undermine justice, as well as the Reverting to the facts of the case in hand, it is not disputed by n arrived at between them and, therefore, compounding of the offence and necessary In view of the was duly issued by the P-1) amicably resolved the dispute and at present, Bank does not harbor any grievance against the petitioner. , vide its judgment dated 25.02.2025, dismissed the appeal AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1509 filed by the petitioner (herein), who was not present before the said Appellate Court to receive the judgment impression that the matter already stood resolve with the respondent Subsequently, during the pendency of the present revision petition, the petitioner has filed two suspension of sentence and (CRM offence, on the ground that the dispute between respondent settlement and in acknowledgment thereof, the respondent issued a certificate confirming the receipt of the amount in question. Thus, the substratum of t the proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose. In these circumstances and the interest of justice would be served if the sentence awarded is suspended and the offence is permitted to be compounded already effected between the parties. requires that the offence(s) ought to be permitted to be compounded and the petitioner deserves to be acquitted. 9. the case; especially factum parties, the petitioner having faced the wrath of criminal litigation since about the year saddled with the responsibility of his family and the petitioner being uneducated person hailing from a rural background and not 1509-2025 filed by the petitioner (herein), who was not present before the said Appellate Court to receive the judgment impression that the matter already stood resolve with the respondent Subsequently, during the pendency of the present revision petition, the petitioner has filed two applications i.e. suspension of sentence and (CRM-23697 , on the ground that the dispute between respondent-Bank now stands amicably settled and pursuant to such settlement and in acknowledgment thereof, the respondent issued a certificate confirming the receipt of the amount in question. Thus, the substratum of the complaint no longer survives and the continuation of the proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose. In these circumstances and the interest of justice would be served if the sentence awarded is suspended and the offence is permitted to be compounded already effected between the parties. In view of the above as also requires that the offence(s) ought to be permitted to be compounded and the petitioner deserves to be acquitted. Keeping in view the entirety of attending facts/circumstances of the case; especially factum that the matter already stood between the rival , the petitioner having faced the wrath of criminal litigation since about the year 2017, the petitioner being a per saddled with the responsibility of his family and the petitioner being uneducated person hailing from a rural background and not 9 filed by the petitioner (herein), who was not present before the said Appellate Court to receive the judgment, as he was under the bona fide impression that the matter already stood resolve with the respondent-Bank Subsequently, during the pendency of the present revision petition, the s i.e. (CRM-23696-2025) seeking 23697-2025) seeking compounding the , on the ground that the dispute between the petitioner and the Bank now stands amicably settled and pursuant to such settlement and in acknowledgment thereof, the respondent-Bank has duly issued a certificate confirming the receipt of the amount in question. Thus, he complaint no longer survives and the continuation of the proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose. In these circumstances and the interest of justice would be served if the sentence awarded is suspended and the offence is permitted to be compounded in light of the settlement view of the above as also the factual matrix of the case requires that the offence(s) ought to be permitted to be compounded and the in view the entirety of attending facts/circumstances of that the matter already stood between the rival , the petitioner having faced the wrath of criminal litigation since , the petitioner being a person aged about 68 years saddled with the responsibility of his family and the petitioner being uneducated person hailing from a rural background and not belonging to filed by the petitioner (herein), who was not present before the said , as he was under the bona fide Bank. Subsequently, during the pendency of the present revision petition, the 2025) seeking compounding the the petitioner and the Bank now stands amicably settled and pursuant to such Bank has duly issued a certificate confirming the receipt of the amount in question. Thus, he complaint no longer survives and the continuation of the proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose. In these circumstances and the interest of justice would be served if the sentence awarded is suspended in light of the settlement the factual matrix of the case requires that the offence(s) ought to be permitted to be compounded and the in view the entirety of attending facts/circumstances of that the matter already stood between the rival , the petitioner having faced the wrath of criminal litigation since years saddled with the responsibility of his family and the petitioner being an belonging to AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR-1509 affluent society; this Court does not deem it appropriate to saddle the petitioner with 10. (i) learned Additional also the order of sentence dated Judicial Magistrate, Gidderbaha, District Sri Muktsar Sahib the petitioner is acquitted Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (ii) August 21 Ajay 1509-2025 affluent society; this Court does not deem it appropriate to saddle the petitioner with costs. In view of the prevenient ratiocination The impugned judgment dated Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib also the order of sentence dated 23.01.2020 Judicial Magistrate, Gidderbaha, District Sri Muktsar Sahib the petitioner is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Pending application(s), if any, shall al 21, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: 10 affluent society; this Court does not deem it appropriate to saddle the prevenient ratiocination, it is ordained thus: - judgment dated 25.02.2025 passed by the Sri Muktsar Sahib & the judgment as 23.01.2020 passed by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gidderbaha, District Sri Muktsar Sahib are set-aside and of the offence punishable under Section 138 of Pending application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No affluent society; this Court does not deem it appropriate to saddle the passed by the & the judgment as Sub Divisional aside and of the offence punishable under Section 138 of AJAY KUMAR 2025.08.22 15:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document