IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Revision No. 233 of 2026 Date of Decision: 15.5.2026. Ram Prakash ...Petitioner Versus Bhagat Ram & anr. ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Jagan Nath, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Ms. Suman Kumari, Advocate. For Respondent No.2/State : Mr. Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (Oral) It has been stated on behalf of the respondent/complainant that the matter has been reconciled between the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the receipt dated 15.5.2026, issued by Member Secretary, H.P. Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti, Shimla, regarding the deposit of ₹11,250/- being the 15% of the cheque amount of ₹1,50,000/-, which is taken on record. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 3. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1/complainant-Bhagat Ram, who is present in person before the Court, under instructions, submits that the matter has been reconciled between the parties and she has instructions not to press the complaint. 4. In view of this statement, the present revision is allowed and the judgment passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No.2/10 of 2025, titled Ram Prakash Vs. Bhagat Ram afÏrming the judgment of conviction dated 28.9.2024 and order of sentence dated 2.1.2025, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, H.P. in Complaint (Registration) No. 186 of 2019, titled Bhagat Ram Vs. Ram Prakash are ordered to be set aside and the complaint is dismissed as not pressed. 5. It has been submitted that ₹30,000/- have been deposited in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. which has to be disbursed to the petitioner/accused in term of the compromise. Let the amount of ₹30,000/-, deposited in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. are ordered to be disbursed to the petitioner/accused by remitting the same to his 3 bank account on furnishing of the bank account details, if not furnished earlier. 6. It has been submitted that no other amount has been deposited before the learned Trial Court or this Court. In view of this statement, no other order is required to be passed for the disbursal of the amount by this Court. 7. In view of the above, the present revision is disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 15th May, 2026 (Chander)