Cheque dishonour case where the accused's conviction under Section 138 NI Act was affirmed on appeal. Parties settled amicably; the High Court compounded the offence under Section 147 NI Act, quashed the convictions and acquitted the accused, releasing the deposited compensation to the complainant and imposing compounding fees.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. Revision No.244 of 2016 Date of Decision: 18.06.2026
__________________________________________________________________________ Yadvinder Singh
……...Petitioner
Versus
Noop Ram
…....Respondent
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioners: Mr. H.S. Rangra, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate. _________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Instant criminal revision petition filed under Sections 397 & 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, lays challenge to judgment dated 13.07.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No.70 of 2014, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.10.2014 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, H.P., in Criminal complaint No.711/2012, whereby learned Court below, while holding the petitioner-accused (hereinafter ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short ‘Act’) convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- to the respondent-complainant (hereinafter ‘complainant’).
2
3
his acquittal after setting aside the judgments of conviction recorded by the courts below.
4
his being released the amount lying deposited with the learned trial Court as well as Registry of this court, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the accused for compounding the offence, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act as well as in terms of guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Cou rt in Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663 , wherein it has been categorically held that court, while exercising power under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence even after recording of conviction by the courts below.
5
(Sandeep Sharma) Judge
June 18, 2026 (sunil)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a Section 138 NI Act conviction could be compounded under Section 147 of the Act after conviction by courts below, following amicable settlement between the parties.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H.Applied¶8
(2010) 5 SCC 663 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Yadvinder Singh
Noop Ram
Sandeep Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
