Sudarshna Kumari Vs PNB Lambloo and Anr.

2025:HHC:31757

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRA	DESH, SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No.	: 144 of 2025
Decided on	: 15.09.2025
Sudarshna Kumari	…Petitioner
Versus
PNB Lambloo & Anr.	…Respondents

¶3

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

¶4

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶5

For the petitioner :	Petitioner in person with Ms. Seema Azad, Advocate.
For the respondents :	Mr. J.S. Bagga, Advocate, for respondent No. 1.
	Sh. H.S. Rawat, Addl. A.G. with Mr.
	Rohit Sharma, Deputy A.G., for respondent No. 2

¶6

Virender Singh, Judge (oral)

¶7

Petitioner – Sudarshna Kumari has filed the present Criminal Revision against the judgment dated 31.12.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal No. 84 of 2023, titled as ‘Sudarshna Kumari Vs Punjab National Bank Lambloo & Anr.’

¶8

1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

¶9

2025:HHC:31757

¶10

2

¶11

By way of judgment dated 31.12.2024, the learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.06.2023, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 4 Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’), in Criminal Comp. No. 156I of 2022, titled as ‘Punjab National Bank Lambloo Vs M/s Rajpur Enterprises through its Prop. Sudarshna Kumari’.

¶12

Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.06.2023, 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 her to undergo simple imprisonment, for a period of four months and to pay a fine/compensation of Rs. 94,000/ to the complainant.

¶13

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

¶14

During the pendency of the present petition, the parties have settled the matter. Thereafter, the petitioner

¶15

2025:HHC:31757

¶16

3

¶17

has filed application bearing Cr.MP No. 2514 of 2025, for permitting the parties to compound the offence, on the ground that the matter has been settled between them.

¶18

Statements of the petitioner, as well as, the learned Counsel for respondent No. 1, have been recorded, in which, they both have deposed that the dispute with regard to Cheque No. 393305, dated 04.11.2022, has been settled between the parties.

¶19

Today, the accused (petitioner) is present before this Court. She has deposed that she has been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.06.2023.

¶20

Against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the petitioner had filed the appeal before the learned Appellate Court and the learned Appellate Court has dismissed her appeal. Now, she is before this Court, by way of the present Criminal Revision.

¶21

In addition to this, the accused (petitioner) has also submitted that during the pendency of the Criminal Revision, the matter has been compromised between her and the complainant. She has also deposed that she has deposited a sum of Rs. 28,200/, before the learned trial

¶22

2025:HHC:31757

¶23

4

¶24

Court and she has no objection, in case the said amount is released in favour of complainant bank.

¶25

The petitioneraccused has also deposed that on the basis of the said compromise, the present petition may kindly be allowed by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, referred to above, and she may kindly be acquitted of the charge.

¶26

Learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 has also made the similar statement. He has deposed that the respondentBank, has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioneraccused is acquitted by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.06.2023. He also deposed that the amount of compensation i.e. Rs. 28,200/, deposited by the petitioneraccused, before the learned trial Court, be released in favour of respondentbank.

¶27

On the basis of the above statements, one thing is clear that the matter has been settled between the parties and in pursuance of the said settlement, complainant has received the remaining amount of compensation from the petitioner.

¶28

2025:HHC:31757

¶29

5

¶30

According to the respondentcomplainant, the dispute with regard to Cheque No. 393305 dated 04.11.2022, has been settled between the parties.

¶31

Since, the matter, with regard to cheque, in question, has been settled between the parties, as such, the application, bearing Cr.MP No.2514 of 2025, is allowed and the parties are permitted to compound the offence.

¶32

Considering the fact that the application for compounding of the offence has been allowed, the present petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.06.2023, passed by learned trial Court in Comp. 138 N.I. Act No. 156I of 2022, which has been affirmed by learned Appellate Court, in Criminal Appeal No. 84 of 2023, vide judgment dated 31.12.2024, are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 NI Act. Her personal and surety bonds are discharged.

¶33

However, this order shall be subject to deposit of 5% of the cheque amount, as compounding fee, within twelve weeks from today. 50% of the compounding fee be deposited with the Member Secretary, H.P. State Legal

¶34

2025:HHC:31757

¶35

6

¶36

Services Authority, Shimla, and remaining 50% with the H.P. High Court Staff Welfare Organization, Shimla.

¶37

It is further clarified that if the petitioner fails to deposit the compounding fee, as ordered by this Court, within twelve weeks, then, the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed, by reviving the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.06.2023, passed by learned trial Court and in that eventuality, she shall surrender before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive sentence, imposed upon her, by the learned trial Court.

¶38

The amount deposited by the petitioneraccused before the learned trial Court, is ordered to be released in favour of the complainant bank.

¶39

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶40

(Virender Singh) Judge

¶41

15^th September, 2025

¶42

( Pramod Kumar )

Sudarshna Kumari v. PNB Lambloo and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudarshna Kumari v. PNB Lambloo and Anr.

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

Raman Kumar Vs State of Hp

Praveen Kumar Vs Kuldeep Garla and Others

Ajay Deep Singh Vs State of Hp

Amit Kumar Vs M/S Sai Motors and Another

Sudarshna Kumari Vs PNB Lambloo and Anr.

Karam Devi and Another Vs State of Hp