1 38.revn.160.2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.160 OF 2026 Sukhdev .Vs. Shankar Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Mr. D.P. Dapurkar, Advocate for applicant. Mr. Y.A. Kullarwar, Advocate for respondent. CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J. DATE : 28/09/2026 1. Heard Mr. Dapurkar, learned counsel for the applicant. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that by judgment and order dated 02.03.2022 passed by the 7th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amravati in Summary Complaint Case No.535 of 2017, the applicant was sentenced to suffer imprisonment of one month and to pay compensation of Rs.3,20,000/- and in default of payment to suffer additional simple imprisonment of 15 days. 2. The applicant filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.56 of 2022. Vide judgment and order dated 10.6.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-2, Amravati dismissed the appeal, thereby upholding the sentence of imprisonment and compensation amount. Both the learned counsel for the respective parties submit that the parties have agreed to settle the dispute. The entire compensation amount of Rs.3,20,000/- is paid to the 2026:BHC-NAG:12946 2 38.revn.160.2026.odt respondent. According to the terms of settlement, an additional sum of Rs.50,000/- is to be paid to the complainant/respondent. 3. Mr. Kullarwar, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent/complainant has no objection for compounding of the offence, acknowledges the settlement terms and has no objection for quashing of the conviction on the compounding of the offence and settlement. 4. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramawatar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in (2022) 13 SCC 635, was pleased to observe as under :- “11. The Court in Ramgopal .vs. State of M.P., (2022) 14 SCC 531 further postulated that criminal proceedings involving nonheinous offences or offences which are predominantly of a private nature, could be set aside at any stage of the proceedings, including at the appellate level. The Court, however, being conscious of the fact that unscrupulous offenders may attempt to escape their criminal liabilities by securing a compromise through brute force, threats, bribes, or other such unethical and illegal means, cautioned that in cases where a settlement is struck post-conviction, the Courts should, interalia, carefully examine the fashion in which the compromise has been arrived at, as well as, the conduct of the accused before and after the incident in question. While concluding, the Court also formulated certain guidelines and held: (SCC para 19) “19… Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: 19.1 Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; 19.2 Seriousness of the injury, if any; 19.3 Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & 19.4 Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and 3 38.revn.160.2026.odt after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations.” [Emphasis Applied] 12. In view of the settled proposition of law, we affirm the decision of this Court in Ramgopal (Supra) and reiterate that the powers of this Court under Article 142 can be invoked to quash a criminal proceeding on the basis of a voluntary compromise between the complainant/victim and the accused. 13. We, however, put a further caveat that the powers under Article 142 or under Section 482 Cr.P.C., are exercisable in post-conviction matters only where an appeal is pending before one or the other Judicial forum. This is on the premise that an order of conviction does not attain finality till the accused has exhausted his/her legal remedies and the finality is subjudice before an appellate court. The pendency of legal proceedings, be that may before the final Court, is sinequanon to involve the superior court’s plenary powers to do complete justice. Conversely, where a settlement has ensued post the attainment of all legal remedies, the annulment of proceedings on the basis of a compromise would be impermissible. Such an embargo is necessitated to prevent the accused from gaining an indefinite leverage, for such a settlement/compromise will always be loaded with lurking suspicion about its bona fide. We have already clarified that the purpose of these extraordinary powers is not to incentivise any hollowhearted agreements between the accused and the victim but to do complete justice by effecting genuine settlement(s).” 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramawatar (supra) permitted the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of proceedings even after conviction of the accused. The learned Counsel, therefore, prays for quashment of the judgment of conviction as well as the appellate judgment, in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal 4 38.revn.160.2026.odt Procedure. 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjabij Tari ..vs.. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2069 was pleased to observe as under:- “38. Since a very large number of cheque bouncing cases are still pending and interest rates have fallen in the last few years, this Court is of the view that it is time to “revisit and tweak the guidelines”. Accordingly, the aforesaid guidelines of compounding are modified as under:- (a) … (b) … (c) Similarly, if the payment of cheque amount is made before the sessions Court or a High Court in Revision or appeal, such court may compound the offence on the condition that the accused pays 7.5 per cent. of the cheque amount by way of costs.” 7. Since the matter is amicably resolved between the parties and the complainant has no objection for compounding of the offence, the settlement terms are placed on record. It appears that the settlement is voluntary in nature and no force or coercion is applied by the accused. Thus taking into consideration the observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in both the judgments cited herein above, the offence can be allowed to be compounded. Hence, I am inclined to exercise inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and pass the following order:- 5 38.revn.160.2026.odt ORDER (a) The revision application is allowed. (b) The impugned judgment and order dated 10.06.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-2, Amravati in Criminal Appeal No.56 of 2022 and judgment and order dated 02.03.2022 passed by the learned 7th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amravati in Summary Complaint Case No.535 of 2017, are hereby quashed and set aside. (c) In view of Sajabij Tari ..vs.. State of Madhya Pradesh (supra), the applicant shall deposit 7.5% of the cheque amount by way of costs to the High Court Legal Services Sub- Committee, Nagpur. (d) The remaining amount of Rs.50,000/- shall be deposited by the applicant directly into the account of the respondent/complainant through UPI within one week. (e) Failure on the part of the applicant to deposit the aforesaid amount of Rs.50,000/- to the respondent within one week, shall result in cancellation of the aforesaid order of compounding of the offence. (f) The respondent/complainant is permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.2,56,000/- 6 38.revn.160.2026.odt deposited before this Court and Rs.64,000/- deposited before the learned Sessions Court. (g) The revision application is disposed of in aforesaid terms. (h) Put up for compliance on 5.10.2026. (MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.) C.L. Dhakate Signed by: Mr. C.L. Dhakate Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 30/09/2026 16:49:02