Alam Chand Vs Tilak Raj Palta

1 ( 2025:HHC:29532 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

Cr. Revision No.498 of 2025 Date of Decision: 01.09.2025 Alam Chand …Petitioner Versus Tilak Raj Palta …..Respondent Coram:

¶4

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the Petitioner : Petitioner in person with Mr. Mohar Singh Advocate. For the Respondent : Respondent in person with Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate.

¶5

Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)

¶6

Petitioner-Alam Chand has filed the present Criminal Revision Petition against the judgment dated 16.07.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal bearing Registration No.12 of 2022, titled as Alam Chand versus Tilak Raj Palta’.

¶7

By way of judgment dated 16.07.2024, the learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal, filed by the petitioner, against the judgment of conviction dated 15.12.2021 and order of sentence dated dated 16.12.2021 passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Sundernagar,

¶8

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

¶9

2 ( 2025:HHC:29532 )

¶10

District Mandi, H.P., (hereinafter called as the ‘trial Court’), in Criminal Case No.289-I/2016, titled as Tilak Raj Palta versus Alam Chand.

¶11

Vide judgment of conviction dated 15.12.2021 and order of sentence dated 16.12.2021, 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 one year and to pay a compensation of Rs.4,40,000/- to the complainant.

¶12

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

¶13

Now, the petitioner has moved application, bearing Cr.MP No.3866 of 2025, under Section 147 of NI Act, for compounding of offence, on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.

¶14

Statements of the petitioner, as well as, respondent, have been recorded, in which, they have deposed that the dispute, with regard to Cheque No.456721, dated 04.03.2014, has been settled between the parties.

¶15

Today i.e. 01.09.2025, respondent, has stated, regarding the factum, as to why, he had filed the complaint against

¶16

3 ( 2025:HHC:29532 )

¶17

the accused (petitioner), in which, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence have been passed by the learned trial Court, which have unsuccessfully been assailed, before the learned Appellate Court. He has also deposed that the matter has now been settled with the petitioner.

¶18

According to the respondent, he has no objection, if the present revision petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence are ordered to be quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 of NI Act.

¶19

Today, petitioner-accused is also present before this Court and has also stated in the aforesaid terms. He has deposed that he has paid the entire compensation amount and nothing is due against him. He has also 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.

¶20

Apart from this, the petitioner-accused has also given an undertaking that he will deposit the compounding fee within a period of eight weeks from today and in case, he fails to deposit the compounding fee, within the stipulated period, the revision

¶21

4 ( 2025:HHC:29532 )

¶22

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.

¶23

Considering the statement of the petitioner-accused and the respondent, as well as, considering the fact that the matter has been settled between the accused (petitioner) and respondent, application, bearing Cr.MP No.3866 of 2025, is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to compound the offence.

¶24

Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction dated 15.12.2021 and order to sentence dated 16.12.2021 passed by the learned trial Court in Criminal Case No.289-I/2016, which has been affirmed by learned Appellate Court, in Criminal Appeal Registration No.12 of 2022, vide judgment dated 16.07.2024, are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act and property of the petitioner is ordered to be released. His personal and surety bonds are discharged.

¶25

However, this order shall be, subject to the deposit of 15% of the cheque amount, as compounding fee. 50% of the compounding fee be deposited with the Member Secretary, H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla and 50% of the

¶26

5 ( 2025:HHC:29532 )

¶27

compounding fee be deposited with H.P. High Court Staff Welfare Organization, Shimla, within a period of eight weeks, from today.

¶28

It is further clarified that if the petitioner fails to deposit the compounding fee, as ordered by this Court, within a period of eight weeks, then, the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed, by reviving the judgment of conviction dated 15.12.2021 and order of sentence dated 16.12.2021, passed by learned trial Court and in that eventuality, he shall surrender before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive sentence, imposed upon him, by the learned trial Court.

¶29

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

¶30

(Virender Singh) Judge

¶31

September 01, 2025 (subhash)

Alam Chand v. Tilak Raj Palta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alam Chand v. Tilak Raj Palta

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

Sanjay Ranjta Vs Kirti Pal

Reeta Vs State of Hp

Sahil Kumar Vs State of Hp

Manoj Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Kali Dass Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Ankush Kango Vs Satish Kumar and Anr.