Raj Kumar Vs Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bani and Anr.

2025:HHC:31088

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Criminal Revision No. 518 of 2025 Decided on : 10 th September, 2025
Raj Kumar …Petitioner
Versus
Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank & Another …Respondents

¶4

Coram

¶5

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

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶7

For the petitioner :	Petitioner Raj Kumar in the c of HHC Ibrar Mirza No,329 a	ustody nd C.
	Dheeraj No.423, of Police Chamba.	Line,
	Mr. Bodh Raj and Mr. Su Chander, Advocates for petitioner.	bhash the
For the respondent:	Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocat respondent No.1.	e, for
	Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Ad General, for respondent No.2.	vocate

¶8

Virender Singh, Judge (oral)

¶9

Petitioner – Raj Kumar has filed the present revision petition against the judgment dated 06.03.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal No.59 of 2024, titled as Raj Kumar versus Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank.

¶10

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

¶11

2

¶12

2025:HHC:31088

¶13

By way of judgment dated 06.03.2025, the

¶14

learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction, dated 11.06.2024 and order of sentence dated 09.07.2024, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tissa, District Chamba, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’), in Comp. U/s 138 NI Act No.100/2019, titled as Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank versus Raj Kumar.

¶15

Vide judgment of conviction, dated 11.06.2024 and order of sentence dated 09.07.2024, 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.1,30,000/ to the complainant. In default of payment of compensation, he has been directed to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

¶16

3

¶17

2025:HHC:31088

¶18

After dismissal of the appeal by the learned Appellate Court, the present revision petition has been preferred.

¶19

During the pendency of the present petition, the dispute with regard to Cheque No.703701, dated 20.05.2019, has been settled. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed application bearing Cr.MP No.3979 of 2025, for permitting the parties to compound the offence, on the ground that the matter has been settled between them.

¶20

Statements of the petitioner, as well as, learned counsel for the respondent, have been recorded, in which, they both have deposed that the dispute with regard to Cheque No.703701, dated 20.05.2019, has been settled between the parties.

¶21

Today, the accused (petitioner) is present before this Court. He has deposed that he has been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court vide judgment of conviction, dated 11.06.2024 and order of sentence dated 09.07.2024,

¶22

Against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the petitioner had filed the appeal before

¶23

4

¶24

2025:HHC:31088

¶25

the learned Appellate Court and the learned Appellate Court has also dismissed his appeal. Now, he is before this Court, in the present revision petition.

¶26

In addition to this, the accused (petitioner) has also submitted that during the pendency of the revision petition, the matter has been compromised between him and the complainantBank and now nothing is due against him with regard to the cheque in question.

¶27

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 he may kindly be acquitted of the charge.

¶28

In addition to this, the accused (petitioner) has also deposed that he is a poor person and in the recent rainy season, his house has been washed away, as such, some leniency may kindly be shown, while assessing the compounding fee.

¶29

Learned counsel for the respondentBank has also made the similar statement. He has deposed that respondentBank, has no objection, in case, the present

¶30

5 2025:HHC:31088

¶31

petition is allowed and the petitioneraccused is acquitted by setting aside the judgment of conviction, dated 11.06.2024 and order of sentence dated 09.07.2024.

¶32

On the basis of the above statements, one thing is clear that the matter has been settled between the parties. According to the learned counsel for the respondentBank, the dispute with regard to Cheque No.703701 dated 20.05.2019, has been settled between the parties.

¶33

Since, the matter, with regard to cheque, in question, has been settled between the parties, as such, the application, bearing Cr.MP No.3979 of 2025, is allowed and the parties are permitted to compound the offence.

¶34

Considering the fact that the application for compounding of the offence has been allowed, the present petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction, dated 11.06.2024 and order of sentence dated 09.07.2024, passed by learned trial Court in Comp. U/s 138 NI Act No.100/2019, which has been affirmed by learned Appellate Court, in Criminal Appeal No.59 of 2024, vide judgment dated 06.03.2025, are set aside and the

¶35

6

¶36

2025:HHC:31088

¶37

petitioner is acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 NI Act. His personal and surety bonds are discharged.

¶38

The accused (petitioner) has stated that he is a poor person and in the recent rainy season, his house has been washed away, as such, some leniency may kindly be shown, while assessing the compounding fee.

¶39

Considering the said fact, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would meet, if the petitioner is directed to deposit 5% of the cheque amount, as compounding fee, within eight weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. 50% of the compounding fee be deposited with the Member Secretary, H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla, and remaining 50% with the H.P. High Court Staff Welfare Organization, Shimla.

¶40

Since, petitioneraccused is in judicial custody, as such, he is ordered to be released, if not required in any other case.

¶41

It is further clarified that if the petitioner fails to deposit the compounding fee, as ordered by this Court, within eight weeks, then, the present petition shall be

¶42

7

¶43

2025:HHC:31088

¶44

deemed to have been dismissed, by reviving the judgment of conviction, dated 11.06.2024 and order of sentence dated 09.07.2024, 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.

¶45

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any,

¶46

shall also stand disposed of.

¶47

September 10, 2025 (ps)

¶48

( Virender Singh ) Judge

¶49

RAJNI

¶50

Digitally signed by RAJNI Date: 2025.09.11 11:02:44 +0530

Raj Kumar v. Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bani and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar v. Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bani 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

Mohit Kumar Vs State of Hp

Harnoor Tuli Vs State of Hp

Ram Saran Vs Hem Chand Thakur

Ved Vyas Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Ajay Soni Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Bal Kishan Vs State of Hp