p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLREV No.498 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010560632026 Biswanath Moharana …. Petitioner Ms. N. Swain, Advocate -Versus- Branch Manager, Balasore- Bhadrak Central Co-operative Bank, Agarpada, Bhadrak …. Opposite Party Mr. Satyajit Sahu, Advocate CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 18.08.2026 06. 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. Instant revision is filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order as at Annexure-2 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak in Criminal Appeal No.53 of 2010 confirming the order of conviction and sentence awarded in 1CC Case No.654 of 2009 by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, Bhadrak on the grounds stated. 3. But in course of hearing, the parties have compromised the matter. In support of such compromise, a joint affidavit is filed and the same is at Flag-C. 4. Ms. Swain, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the amicable settlement reached at with the outstanding dues paid by the petitioner, to which, the opposite party has issued a no objection certificate dated 17th July, 2026 p. 2 i.e. Annexure-3 and as the offence is one under Section 138 of the NI Act and is compoundable in nature, the order of conviction should be set aside. In support of such contention, Ms. Swain, learned counsel cited a decision of the Apex Court in Parsharvanath Weld Wires Pvt. Ltd. and another Vrs. State of Chhattisgarh and another in Criminal Appeal No.2904 of 2026 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.10110 of 2026 dated 27th May, 2026. The submission is that the conviction and sentence should be quashed in the light of the decision (supra) on account of compromise between both the sides. 5. Mr. Sahu, learned counsel for the opposite party submits that there is a compromise on payment of the outstanding dues. 6. In Parsharvanath Weld Wires Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Apex Court quashed the proceeding after a settlement arrived at between the parties as compounding the offence is allowed under Section 147 of the NA Act when the application filed before the court of first instance was rejected and affirmed by the High Court. Referring to an earlier decision in Gian Chand Garg Vrs. Harpal Singh and another 2025 SCC Online SC 2317, the Apex Court in the aforesaid case held and observed that on account of the compromise between the parties and the offence since compoundable, the order of conviction and sentence is required to be quashed. p. 3 7. In view of the decision (supra) and considering the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties with reference to the joint affidavit as at Flag-C, wherein, it is stated that there has been clearance of dues by the petitioner and the opposite party has no objection, if the proceeding is dropped in connection with 1CC Case No.654 of 2009 and having regard to the above affidavit and in view of the settlement between the parties evident from the same jointly filed as at Flag-C, this Court is of the view that the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act being compoundable in nature in view of Section 147 thereof, the order of conviction directed in 1CC Case No.654 of 2009 and confirmed in appeal vide Annexure-2 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak should be set aside and proceeding as such to be quashed. 8. Accordingly, it is ordered. 9. In the result, the revision stands allowed. Consequently, the impugned order of conviction and sentence upheld in Criminal Appeal No.53 of 2010 corresponding to 1CC Case No.654 of 2009 is hereby set aside and quashed. 10. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge T.Tudu