Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2071 (UTT)

SURESH CHANDRA v. ANKIT KUMAR THAPLIYAL

CRLR/231/2026 · 2026-04-07

Rakesh Thapliyal

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:2447 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS CRLR No. 231 of 2026 In IA 1/2026 (For Compounding Application) Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. M.C. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the revisionist. 2. Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned A.G.A. with Mrs. Meenakshi Sharma and Mrs. Sweta Badola Dobhal, learned Brief Holders for the State. 3. Mr. A.M. Saklani, learned counsel for the respondent. 4. The instant revision has been preferred by the revisionist against the order passed by the Trial Court convicting him for the offence punishable under section 138 of N.I. Act. The conviction and sentence was also confirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 2024 ‘Suresh Chandra vs. Ankit Kumar Thapliyal and Another’ pursuant to the judgment and order dated 02.01.2026. 5. Now, the compounding application has also been filed along with the instant revision with this contention that the entire amount towards fine has been paid by the revisionist to the respondent- complainant. The revisionist and respondent- complainant are present in court. 6. It is argued by the learned counsel for the parties that in terms of section 147 of N.I. Act the offence can be compounded since the entire amount towards the fine has been paid by the revisionist to the respondent. 7. The respondent-complainant also submits that he received the entire money. 8. In such view of the matter, since the parties have settled their dispute and the entire amount towards the fine has been paid by the revisionist to the respondent-complainant, in such view of the matter, this court is of the view that the instant criminal revision as well as the compounding application deserves to be allowed 9. Accordingly, the revision as well as the compounding application are allowed and the 2026:UHC:2447 impugned judgment and order passed by the Judicial Magistrate I, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal dated 09.02.2024 passed in Criminal Case No. 520 of 2017 ‘Ankit Kumar Thapliyal vs. Suresh Chandra’ as well as the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Session Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 2024 ‘Suresh Chandra vs. Ankit Kumar Thapliyal and Another’ dated 02.01.2026 are set aside and the revisionist is acquitted from the charge. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 07.04.2026 PR 2026:UHC:2447