2026:HHC:22888 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Revision No.519 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.06.2026 __________________________________________________________________________ Dumesh Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus Bhagat Ram …....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? __________________________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. Virender K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: None. _________________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, lays challenge to judgment dated 26.06.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, in Regd. CIS No.39 of 2024, Cr. Appeal Filing No.30 of 2024, titled Dumesh Kumar Vs. Bhagat Ram, affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.03.2024, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karsog, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, whereby the learned trial Court while holding the petitioner-accused (hereinafter, ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short the ‘Act’), convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple 2026:HHC:22888 2 imprisonment for a period of two months and pay compensation to the tune of ₹1,60,000/- to the complainant. 2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that respondent-complainant (hereinafter, ‘complainant’) instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Act, in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karsog, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, alleging therein that accused with a view to discharge his liability issued Cheque for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-, but fact remains that aforesaid Cheque on its presentation, was dishonoured. Since petitioner-accused failed to make the payment good within the time stipulated in the legal notice, respondent/complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings before the competent Court of law under Section 138 of the Act. 3. Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment/order dated 19.03.2024, held the petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence 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 Court below, accused preferred an appeal in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, which also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 26.06.2025, as a 2026:HHC:22888 3 consequence of which, judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, present petitioner- accused has approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, seeking therein 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 merits, petitioner-accused has deposited entire amount of compensation before the learned trial Court. 6. Counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that entire amount of compensation is lying deposited with the learned trial Court and the same has been agreed to be released in favour of respondent/complainant. He states that since petitioner/accused has agreed to pay entire amount of compensation awarded by learned trial Court, this Court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act may proceed to compound the offence. 7. Despite service, neither respondent nor any counsel appeared on his behalf and as such, this Court has no option but to consider the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for compounding the offence in the absence of respondent, who, otherwise, in the event of acceptance of prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, shall receive entire amount of compensation awarded by learned trial Court. 2026:HHC:22888 4 8. Since petitioner-accused has deposited entire amount of compensation awarded before the learned trial Court, coupled with the fact that same has been agreed to be released in favour of complainant, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for compounding of 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. 9. Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated 26.06.2025 and 19.03.2024, passed by the learned Appellate Court and learned trial Court are quashed and set aside and the petitioner-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, are discharged. Entire amount lying deposited with the learned trial Court is ordered to be released in favour of the respondent-complainant by remitting the same in his bank account. 10. Since respondent/complainant was compelled to engage in unwarranted litigation with the petitioner/accused for realization of his 2026:HHC:22888 5 own money, petitioner-accused is directed to pay a sum of ₹10,000/- as litigation charges in favour of respondent/complainant and further to deposit sum of ₹5,000/- with the H.P. State Legal Service Authority as compounding fee, within a period of eight weeks, failing which petitioner/accused shall render himself for penal consequences as well as Contempt of Court. 11. Registry of this Court is further directed to send copy of instant judgment to the respondent, on the address given in the memo of parties, through registered post, enabling him to take appropriate steps for release of amount lying deposited with the learned trial Court. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge June 18, 2026 (Rajeev Raturi)