Narinder Kumar Vs Salochna Devi — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Narinder Kumar Vs Salochna Devi — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; conviction and sentence in Criminal complaint No. 300-I-17/2015 (as affirmed in Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2022 and Cr. Revision No. 55 of 2024) quashed on the basis of compromise; Rs. 3,70,000/- court deposit ordered disbursed to the complainant through her savings bank account.

Issue for consideration

Whether the conviction and sentence of the petitioner, already affirmed in appeal and finalized in criminal revision, can be quashed on the basis of the compromise effected between the parties.

Court's answer

Following the binding Division Bench decision in Chune Ram vs. Brikam Chand, 2025:HHC:38122, the conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.II, Una in Cr. Complaint No. 300-I-17/2015, as affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Una in Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2022 and by this Court in Cr. Revision No. 55 of 2024 (decided on 24.03.2025), are ordered to be quashed on the basis of the compromise effected between the parties.

Ratio / Principle

The amount of Rs. 3,70,000/- deposited in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Amb, District Una is ordered to be disbursed to the respondent/complainant by remitting the same to her savings bank account on furnishing of the bank account details, if not furnished earlier.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla (Rakesh Kainthla, J.) allowed Cr. MMO No. 58 of 2026 filed by Narinder Kumar and quashed his conviction and sentence in Criminal complaint No. 300-I-17/2015 (Salochna Devi versus Narender Kumar) awarded by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.II, Amb, District Una, H.P. vide judgment and order dated 16.07.2022, and affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Una (Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2022) and by this Court (Cr. Revision No. 55 of 2024, decided 24.03.2025), on the basis of the compromise effected between the parties, following the Division Bench decision in Chune Ram vs. Brikam Chand, 2025:HHC:38122 that a conviction can be quashed even after its finalization in criminal revision based on compromise. A receipt of ₹1,50,000/- (15% of the cheque amount of ₹10,00,000/-) was placed on record, and the ₹3,70,000/- deposited in the trial court was ordered to be disbursed to the complainant by remittance to her savings bank account.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. MMO No. 58 of 2026 Date of Decision: 09.03.2026.

Narinder Kumar ...Petitioner

Versus

Salochna Devi ...Respondents

Coram

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

For the Petitioner	: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate.
For Respondent	: Mr. Virender Kumar, Advocate.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (Oral)

A receipt of ₹1,50,000/- being the 15% of the cheque amount of ₹10,00,000/- has been placed on record. Learned counsel for respondent/complainant, under instructions, submits that the matter has been reconciled between the parties and he has no objection in case the present petition is allowed.

The record shows that the petitioner/accused was convicted and sentenced by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.II, Amb, District Una, H.P. in Criminal complaint No.300-I-17/2015 titled Salochna Devi versus Narender Kumar

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

2

vide judgment and order dated 16.07.2022. The petitioner/accused unsuccessfully challenged his conviction and sentence before learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Una in Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2022 titled Narinder Kumar vs Salochana Devi and before this Court in Cr. Revision No. 55 of 2024 titled Narinder Kumar versus Solochna Devi.

The Division Bench of this Court held in Chune Ram vs. Brikam Chand, 2025:HHC:38122 decided on 13.11.2025 that the Court can quash the conviction even after its finalization in criminal revision based on the compromise effected between the parties. This judgment is binding upon this Court.

In view of this judgment, the present petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.II, Una in Cr. Complaint No. 300-I--17/2015 as affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Una, District Una, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2022, titled Narinder Kumar Vs. Salochana Devi and by this Court in Cr. Revision No. 55 of 2024 titled Narinder Kumar versus Salochana Devi, decided on 24.03.2025 are ordered to be quashed.

3

It has been submitted that ₹3,70,000/- have been deposited in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Amb, District Una, which are to be disbursed to the complainant in terms of the compromise. Let the amount of ₹3,70,000/- deposited in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Amb, District Una, HP are ordered to be disbursed to the respondent/complainant by remitting the same to her savings bank account on furnishing of the bank account details, if not furnished earlier.

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

(Rakesh Kainthla) Judge

9^th March, 2026 (Nikita)