Ram Prakash Vs Bhagat Ram and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ram Prakash Vs Bhagat Ram and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Revision petition allowed and disposed of; judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No.2/10 of 2025 affirming conviction dated 28.9.2024 and sentence dated 2.1.2025 of learned CJM, Bilaspur set aside; complaint dismissed as not pressed; Rs. 30,000/- deposited in the Sessions Judge's court to be remitted to the petitioner/accused's bank account on furnishing of account details; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal revision petition challenging the conviction and sentence should be allowed in view of the reconciliation between the parties and the complainant's instructions not to press the complaint. +1 more

Court's answer

On the basis of the parties' reconciliation and the complainant's statement that she would not press the complaint, the present revision is allowed; the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No.2/10 of 2025 affirming the conviction dated 28.9.2024 and sentence dated 2.1.2025 is set aside and the complaint is dismissed as not pressed.

Ratio / Principle

The amount of Rs. 30,000/- deposited in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. is ordered to be disbursed to the petitioner/accused by remitting the same to his bank account on furnishing of the bank account details, if not furnished earlier.

Key takeaways

Since no other amount has been deposited before the learned Trial Court or this Court, no other order is required to be passed for the disbursal of any amount by this Court.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla — Cr. Revision No. 233 of 2026, decided 15.5.2026 by Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (Oral). On the statement that the matter had been reconciled between the parties, and with complainant Bhagat Ram present in person submitting that she had instructions not to press the complaint, the Court allowed the revision petition of Ram Prakash. The judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No.2/10 of 2025, affirming the judgment of conviction dated 28.9.2024 and order of sentence dated 2.1.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur in Complaint (Registration) No. 186 of 2019, was set aside and the complaint dismissed as not pressed. Counsel for the petitioner produced a receipt dated 15.5.2026 issued by the Member Secretary, H.P. Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti, Shimla regarding deposit of Rs. 11,250/- (15% of the cheque amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-), taken on record. The Rs. 30,000/- deposited in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur was ordered disbursed to the petitioner/accused by remitting it to his bank account on furnishing of account details; no other amount having been deposited, no further disbursal order was passed; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. Revision No. 233 of 2026 Date of Decision: 15.5.2026.

Ram Prakash ...Petitioner

Versus

Bhagat Ram & anr. ...Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla , Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the Petitioner	: Mr.	Jagan Nath, Advocate.
For Respondent No.1	: Ms.	Suman Kumari, Advocate.
For Respondent No.2/State	: Mr. Adv	Ajit Sharma, Deputy ocate General.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (Oral)

It has been stated on behalf of the respondent/complainant that the matter has been reconciled between the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the receipt dated 15.5.2026, issued by Member Secretary, H.P. Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti, Shimla, regarding the deposit of

₹11,250/- being the 15% of the cheque amount of ₹1,50,000/-,

which is taken on record.

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

2

Learned counsel for the respondent

No.1/complainant-Bhagat Ram, who is present in person before the Court, under instructions, submits that the matter has been reconciled between the parties and she has instructions not to press the complaint.

In view of this statement, the present revision is allowed and the judgment passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No.2/10 of 2025, titled Ram Prakash Vs. Bhagat Ram afÏrming the judgment of conviction dated 28.9.2024 and order of sentence dated 2.1.2025, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, H.P. in Complaint (Registration) No. 186 of 2019, titled Bhagat Ram Vs. Ram Prakash are ordered to be set aside and the complaint is dismissed as not pressed.

It has been submitted that ₹30,000/- have been deposited in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. which has to be disbursed to the petitioner/accused in term of the compromise. Let the amount of ₹30,000/-, deposited in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. are ordered to be disbursed to the petitioner/accused by remitting the same to his

3

bank account on furnishing of the bank account details, if not furnished earlier.

It has been submitted that no other amount has been deposited before the learned Trial Court or this Court. In view of this statement, no other order is required to be passed for the disbursal of the amount by this Court.

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

(Rakesh Kainthla) Judge

15^th May, 2026 (Chander)