Kundan Lal vs. Vikas Sharma Cr.MP(M) No.673 of 2026 23.04.2026 Present Ms. Lalita Devi, Advocate, for the applicant. Cr.MP (M) No.673 of 2026 By way of instant application, prayer has been made on behalf of the applicant/petitioner for condonation of delay in filing the accompanying petition, which is barred by limitation. Having carefully perused the averments contained in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, this Court is convinced and satisfied that delay in maintaining the accompanying petition is neither intentional nor deliberate, rather same has occurred on the account of the circumstances, which were completely beyond the control of the applicant/petitioner and as such, delay of 17 days in filing the petition, which in my considered view has been sufficiently explained, is condoned. The petition be registered. The application stands disposed of. Cr. Revision No.______ of 2026 Though, by way of instant Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 438/442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, challenge has been laid to judgment dated 08.12.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No.43-ASJ-II/10 of 2024/2023, affirming the judgment of conviction dated 14.07.2023 and order of sentence dated 26.07.2023, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Case No.18/3 of 2018, whereby learned trial Court, while holding the petitioner-accused (hereinafter, ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offence punishable under S. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, (for short ‘Act’) convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and pay fine to the tune of Rs.2,20,000/- to the respondent-complainant (hereinafter, ‘complainant’), but before the case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merit, parties have entered into the compromise, whereby they have resolved to settle their dispute amicably interse them. Though, careful perusal of the compromise placed on record clearly establishes factum with regard to compromise interse parties, but with a view to ascertain the correctness of the same, this Court deems it necessary to cause presence of both the parties in the Court on the next date of hearing. In view of the above, list this matter on 29.04.2026, on which date, both the parties shall remain present in Court. Since learned counsel representing the petitioner undertakes to cause presence of the respondent/complainant on the next date of hearing, there is no necessity to issue notice to him. (Sandeep Sharma) Judge April 23, 2026 (shankar)