Virender Singh Vs Ajay Singh — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Virender Singh Vs Ajay Singh — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the conviction and sentence awarded by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.II, Amb, District Una, H.P., as affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Una, District Una, H.P. and this Court in Criminal Revision No. 240 of 2022; petition and pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the conviction and sentence can be quashed even after finalization of the criminal revision, based on the compromise effected between the parties. +1 more

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

In view of the Chune Ram judgment, the present petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence awarded by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.II, Amb, District Una, H.P., as affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Una, District Una, H.P., and this Court in Criminal Revision No. 240 of 2022, are ordered to be quashed.

Key takeaways

Since it was submitted that no amount had been deposited before the learned Trial Court or this Court, no order was required to be passed for the disbursal of the amount by this Court.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Compromise-based quashing after finalised revision: following the binding Division Bench ruling in Chune Ram vs. Brikam Chand, 2025:HHC:38122 (decided 13.11.2025) that a conviction can be quashed even after finalization of criminal revision based on a compromise between the parties, the High Court allowed Cr. MP No. 1453 of 2026 and quashed the conviction and sentence awarded on 02.09.2019 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.II, Amb, District Una, H.P. in Criminal Case No. 53 of 2017 (Ajay Singh vs. Virender Singh), as affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge (I), Una in Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2019 and by this Court in Criminal Revision No. 240 of 2022 (decided 20.09.2024). Counsel for the applicant produced a receipt dated 11.05.2026 of the H.P. Legal Services Authority evidencing deposit of ₹30,000/- (15% of the cheque amount of ₹2,50,000/-), taken on record; since no amount had been deposited before the Trial Court or this Court, no disbursal order was passed. Petition and pending miscellaneous application(s) disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. MP No. 1453 of 2026 in Cr. Revision No. 240 of 2022 Date of Decision: 21.05.2026.

Virender Singh ...Applicant/Petitioner

Versus

Ajay Singh ...Non-applicant/Respondent

Coram

Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla , Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹

: For the Applicant/Petitioner Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate. For the Non-Applicant/Respondent : Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashisht, Advocate.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge (Oral)

Learned counsel for the applicant/convict has produced the receipt dated 11.05.2026, issued by Member Secretary, H.P. Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti, Shimla, regarding the deposit of ₹30,000/- being the 15% of the cheque amount of ₹2,50,000/-, which is taken on record.

The record shows that the petitioner/accused was convicted and sentenced by learned Judicial Magistrate First

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

2

Class, Court No.II, Amb, District Una, H.P. on 02.09.2019, in Criminal Case No. 53 of 2017, titled Ajay Singh Vs. Virender Singh, as affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Una, District Una, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2019, titled Virender Singh Vs. Ajay Singh and this Court in Criminal Revision No.240 of 2022, titled Virender Singh Vs. Ajay Singh, dated 20.09.2024.

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 learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.II, Amb, District Una, H.P. as affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Una, District Una, H.P. and this Court in Criminal Revision No. 240 of 2022 are ordered to be quashed.

It has been submitted that no amount has been deposited before the learned Trial Court or this Court. In view of

3

this, no order is required to be passed for the disbursal of the amount by this Court.

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

(Rakesh Kainthla) Judge

21^st May, 2026 (Nikita)