Surjit Kumar Gupta Vs M/s Lakshmi Fruit Co. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Surjit Kumar Gupta Vs M/s Lakshmi Fruit Co. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Revision petition allowed: the judgment dated 24.03.2023 of the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2022, affirming the conviction dated 17.08.2022 and sentence dated 26.08.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Manali in complaint No. 504 of 2016, is set aside and the complaint is dismissed as not pressed; the amounts of Rs. 30,000/- (Trial Court) and Rs. 1,50,660/- (Registry of this Court) are to be released to the complainant; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal revision petition should be allowed and the conviction and sentence set aside, in view of the matter having been reconciled between the parties and the respondent/complainant not wishing to proceed further.

Court's answer

Since the matter has been reconciled between the parties and the respondent/complainant does not want to proceed further, the present petition is allowed; the judgment dated 24.03.2023 of the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2022, affirming the judgment of conviction dated 17.08.2022 and order of sentence dated 26.08.2022 of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Manali in complaint No. 504 of 2016, is set aside and the complaint is dismissed as not pressed.

Ratio / Principle

The amount of Rs. 30,000/- deposited before the learned Trial Court and the amount of Rs. 1,50,660/- deposited before the Registry of this Court shall be released in favour of the complainant by remitting the same into his savings bank account on furnishing the bank details, if not furnished earlier, under proper receipt and identification.

Key takeaways

Two receipts dated 05.09.2025/17.10.2025 issued by the Member Secretary, H.P. Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti, Shimla, regarding deposits of Rs. 18,070/- being 15% of the cheque amount of Rs. 1,20,440/-, placed by the petitioner's counsel, are taken on record.obiter¶¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla (Rakesh Kainthla, J., oral) — Cr. Revision No. 274 of 2023, decided 19.12.2025: Surjit Kumar Gupta v. M/s Lakshmi Fruit Company. Upon the respondent/complainant submitting, under instructions, that the matter had been reconciled between the parties and that it did not wish to proceed further, the Court allowed the revision petition, set aside the judgment dated 24.03.2023 of the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2022 — which had affirmed the judgment of conviction dated 17.08.2022 and order of sentence dated 26.08.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Manali in complaint No. 504 of 2016 — and dismissed the complaint as not pressed. Two receipts dated 05.09.2025/17.10.2025 issued by the Member Secretary, H.P. Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti, Shimla, regarding deposits of Rs. 18,070/- being 15% of the cheque amount of Rs. 1,20,440/-, were taken on record. The Court directed that Rs. 30,000/- deposited before the learned Trial Court and Rs. 1,50,660/- deposited before the Registry of the High Court be released to the complainant by remittance into his savings bank account on furnishing bank details, under proper receipt and identification. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, were also disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. Revision No.274 of 2023 Date of Decision: 19.12.2025.

Surjit Kumar Gupta ...Petitioner Versus M/s Lakshmi Fruit Company ...Respondent

Coram

Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla , Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ No.

For the Petitioner : Mr. Panku Chauhdary, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Ashok Kumar Tyagi, Advocate.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (oral)

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record two receipts dated 05.09.2025/17.10.2025 amounting to ₹18,000/- and amounting to ₹70/-, respectively issued by the Member Secretary, H.P. Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti, Shimla, regarding the deposits of ₹18,070/- being 15% of the cheque amount of ₹1,20,440/-, which are taken on record.

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

2

2. Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant

under instructions, submits that the matter has been reconciled between the parties.

Since the matter has been reconciled between the parties and the respondent/complainant does not want to proceed further with the matter, therefore, the present petition is allowed and the judgment dated 24.03.2023, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P. (learned Appellate Court) in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2022 affirming the judgment of conviction dated 17.08.2022 and order of sentence dated 26.08.2022, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Manali, District Kullu H.P. (learned Trial Court) in complaint No. 504 of 2016 are ordered to be set aside and the complaint is dismissed as not pressed.

Learned counsel for the parties submit that an amount of ₹30,000/- has been deposited before learned Trial Court and an amount of ₹1,50,660/- has been deposited before the Registry of this Court, which is to be disbursed to the complainant as per compromise effected between the parties. hHence, it is ordered that amount of ₹30,000/- deposited before

3

the learned Trial Court and the amount of ₹1,50,660/- deposited before the Registry of this Court be released in favour of the complainant by remitting the same in his savings bank account on furnishing the bank details, if not furnished earlier, under proper receipt and identification.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any

(Rakesh Kainthla) Judge

19^th Decmeber, 2025. (ravinder)