Sanjay Kumar Vs Hem Singh and another

1

( 2025:HHC:37854 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

Cr. Revision No.116 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.11.2025 Sanjay Kumar …Petitioner Versus Hem Singh & Anr. …..Respondents

¶5

Coram:

¶6

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶7

For the Petitioner : Petitioner in person with Mr. Chandresh Pal, Advocate, vice Mr. Narendra Guleria, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rohit Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocates General for respondent No.1. Mr. Mukesh Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

¶8

Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)

¶9

Petitioner-Sanjay Kumar has filed the present Criminal Revision against the judgment dated 04.01.2025, passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal bearing No.106 of 2024, titled as ‘Sanjay Kumar vs. Hem Singh’.

¶10

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶11

2 ( 2025:HHC:37854 )

¶12

By way of judgment dated 04.01.2025, the learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal, filed by the petitioner, against the judgment of conviction dated 02.09.2024 and order of sentence dated 04.09.2024, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.3, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., (hereinafter called as the ‘trial Court’), in Criminal Complaint No.799 of 2016, titled as ‘Hem Singh versus Sanjay Kumar’.

¶13

Vide judgment of conviction dated 02.09.2024 and order of sentence dated 04.09.2024, the learned trial Court has convicted the petitioner, for the offence, punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NI Act’) and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment, for a period of two months and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant.

¶14

After dismissal of the appeal by the learned Appellate Court, the present Criminal Revision has been preferred.

¶15

Now, the petitioner has moved Cr.MP No.4886 of 2025, under Section 147 of NI Act, for compounding of offence.

¶16

Statements of the petitioner, as well as, learned counsel, appearing for respondent have been recorded, in

¶17

3 ( 2025:HHC:37854 )

¶18

which, they have agreed that the dispute, with regard to Cheque No.000006, dated 07.09.2016 has been settled, between the parties.

¶19

Today i.e. 10.11.2025, learned counsel, appearing for respondent, under instructions, has stated, regarding the factum, as to why, respondent had filed the complaint, against the accused (petitioner), in which, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence have been passed, which have unsuccessfully been assailed, before the learned Appellate Court. He has also deposed that the matter has been settled with the petitioner.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent, has further deposed that the respondent has no objection, if the present revision petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court, are ordered to be quashed and set-aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 of NI Act.

¶21

Today, petitioner is also present before this Court and has also stated in the aforesaid terms. He has deposited a sum of Rs.50,000/- before the learned trial Court. He has no objection, in case, the amount, so deposited, before the learned

¶22

4

¶23

( 2025:HHC:37854 )

¶24

trial Court, be released in favour of complainant. He has paid the entire settled amount to the respondent and now nothing is due against him with regard to the cheque in question. He has deposed that on the basis of the compromise, the present petition may be allowed by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, referred to above, and he may be acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 of NI Act.

¶25

Apart from this, the petitioner-accused has also given an undertaking that he will deposit the compounding fee, within a period of four weeks from today and in case, he fails to deposit the compounding fee, within the stipulated period, the revision petition may be treated, as dismissed and in that eventuality, he will surrender before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive sentence, imposed upon him, by the learned trial Court.

¶26

Considering the statements of the parties, as well as, considering the fact that the matter has been settled between the accused (petitioner) and the complainant, Cr.MP No.4886 of 2025, is allowed and the parties to the lis are permitted to compound the offence.

¶27

5 ( 2025:HHC:37854 )

¶28

13. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and

¶29

the judgment of conviction dated 02.09.2024 and order of sentence dated 04.09.2024, passed by the learned trial Court, in Criminal Complaint Case No.799 of 2016, which has been affirmed by learned Appellate Court, in Criminal Appeal bearing No.106 of 2024, vide judgment dated 04.01.2025, are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act. His personal and surety bonds are discharged.

¶30

However, this order shall be, subject to the deposit of 7.50% of the cheque amount, as compounding fee. 50% of the amount of compounding fee shall be deposited by the accused with the Member Secretary, H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla, and remaining 50% of the aforesaid amount shall be deposited with the Chief Justice, Disaster Relief Fund, within a period of four weeks from today.

¶31

It is further clarified that if the petitioner fails to deposit the compounding fee, as ordered by this Court, within a period of four weeks, then, the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed, by reviving the judgment of conviction dated 02.09.2024 and order of sentence dated 04.09.2024, passed by learned trial Court and in that eventuality, he shall

¶32

6 ( 2025:HHC:37854 )

¶33

surrender before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive sentence, imposed upon him, by the learned trial Court. The amount of Rs.50,000/- deposited before the learned trial Court be released in favour of the complainant.

¶34

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

¶35

also stand disposed of.

¶36

(Virender Singh) Judge

¶37

November, 10, 2025 (subhash)

Sanjay Kumar v. Hem Singh and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar v. Hem Singh and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Kumar Vs Swaroop Singh

Mahinder Singh Vs Ashok Kumar and Anr.

Kediya Ram Vs State of Hp

State of Hp Vs Nirmla Devi

State of Hp Vs Pankaj Kumar

Pushpender Singh Chauhan and Anr. Vs State of Hp and Anr.