The court permitted the compounding of an offence under Section 138 of the NI Act after the parties settled the dispute, emphasizing the role of mutual agreement in such cases.

JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, J.

Petitioner-Yaad Ram has filed the present Criminal Revision Petition against the judgment dated 22.03.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘First Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal No.147-N/10 of 2022, titled as ‘Yaad Ram Vs. H.P. State Co-Operative Agriculture Rural Development Bank’.

2. By way of judgment dated 22.03.2024, the learned First Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal, filed by the petitioner, against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.10.2022, passed by the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. (hereinafter called as the trial Court), in case No.177/3 of 2021, titled as ‘The H.P. State Cooperative Agriculture & Rural Development Bank Vs. Yaad Ram’.

3. Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.10.2022, the 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 six months and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- to the complainant.

4. After dismissal of the appeal by the learned First Appellate Court, the present Criminal Revision Petition has been preferred.

5. Now, the petitioner has moved application, bearing CrMP No.820 of 2025, under Section 147 of NI Act, for compounding of offence on the ground that he has already settled the entire loan amount with the respondent-Bank.

6. Today, statements of both the parties have been recorded, in which, they have deposed that the dispute, with regard to Cheque No.007354, dated 14.01.2021, has been settled between them.

7. Today i.e. 21.03.2025, Mr. Bishan Dass, Branch Manager of respondent-Bank, has stated on oath, regarding the factum, as to why, the Bank has filed the complaint against the accused (petitioner herein), in which, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence have been passed, which has unsuccessfully been assailed, before the learned First Appellate Court. He has also deposed that the matter has been settled between the respondent-Bank and the petitioner, qua Cheque No.007354, dated 14.01.2021, amounting to Rs.1,56,822/. According to him, the respondent-Bank has no objection, if the present revision petition is allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence are ordered to be set aside and the amount, which the petitioner has deposited with the learned trial Court, as well as, with this Court, be released in his favour.

8. Petitioner-Yaad Ram is also present before this Court and he has also stated in the aforesaid terms. He has also deposed that on the basis of the settlement, the present petition may be allowed by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, referred to above, and he may be acquitted from the offence, punishable under Section 138 of NI Act. He has further deposed that he has no objection in case, the amount of compensation is released in favour of the complainant.

9. Petitioner has further deposed that he has deposited a sum of Rs.54,000/- with this Court and a sum of Rs.31,365/- with the learned trial Court and since, he has settled the matter with the respondent-Bank, as such, the said amount, which he has deposited with this Court, as well as, with the learned trial Court, may be refunded to him.

10. In addition to this, the petitioner has also put forward the indigent circumstances, by stating that some relaxation may be given in the compounding fee.

11. Apart from this, the petitioner-accused has also given an undertaking that he will deposit 50% of the compounding fee with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla and remaining 50% of the compounding fee with H.P. High Court Staff Welfare Organization, Shimla, within a period of four weeks from today, and in case, he fails to deposit the compounding fee, within the stipulated peri