2026:HHC:16748 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Criminal Revision No.249 of 2014 Date of Decision: 13.5.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Smt. Polina ……...Petitioner Versus Golf Link Finance & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. ….….Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Bhim Raj Sharma, Advocate, vice Mr. Hardeep Verma, Advocate. For the Respondent: Ms. Seema Guleria, Advocate. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Instant criminal revision petition, lays challenge to judgment dated 10.12.2013, passed by the learned Sessions (Forests), Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No. 31-S/10 of 2013, affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.1.2013/7.3.2013, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class- 3, Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Case No. 2058/3 of 2010/09, whereby the learned trial Court while holding the petitioner- accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short the “Act"), convicted and sentenced her to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months and pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 14,000/- to the complainant. 2026:HHC:16748 2 2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that respondent-complainant instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Act, in the court of competent court of law, alleging therein that accused with a view to discharge her liability issued cheque amounting to Rs. 10,000 /- but fact remains that aforesaid cheque on its presentation, was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. 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 11.1.2013/7.3.2013 held the petitioner-accused guilty of having committed offence under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, convicted and sentenced her as per the description given herein above. 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 first appellate court, which also came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 10.12.2013, as a 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 2026:HHC:16748 3 Court by way of instant proceedings, seeking therein her acquittal after setting aside the judgments of conviction recorded by the courts below. 5. Mr. Bhim Raj Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Hardeep Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused, states that since matter stands amicably settled between the parties, this Court while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence and acquit the accused. 6. Ms. Seema Guleria, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-complainant, states that her client has no objection in compounding the offence in case amount lying deposited before the courts below is release in his favour. 7. Having taken note of the fact that entire amount of compensation stands paid/agreed to be paid to the respondent- complainant and respondent has no objection in compounding the offence, 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. 2026:HHC:16748 4 8. Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated 11.1.2013/7.3.2013 and 10.12.2023, passed by the courts below are quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge framed against her under Section 138 of the Act. Interim order, if any, is vacated. Bail bonds, if any, are discharged. Petitioner shall pay 15% of the cheque amount as compounding fee with the Himachal Pradesh State Legal Services Authority, within a period of six weeks, failing which, accused besides rendering herself liable for penal consequences would also invite contempt proceedings. Learned courts below are directed to release the amount deposited by the petitioner in the instant case in favour of the complainant on filing appropriate application within one week, providing therein account details of the complainant. The petition is disposed of along with pending applications, if any. May 13, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge