The court allows compounding of an offence under Section 138 of the NI Act after the parties settle their dispute, provided the compounding fee is deposited as directed.

JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, J.

Petitioner-Keshav Deen has filed the present revision petition against the judgment dated 16.08.2023, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘First Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal No.75-S/10 of 2022, titled as Keshav Deen versus Himachal Pradesh Minorities Finance & Development Corporation.

2. By way of judgment dated 16.08.2023, the learned First Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of convictionand order of sentence dated 03.08.2022, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.3, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’), in Criminal Case RBT No.347-3 of 18/16, titled as Himachal Pradesh Minorities Finance &Development Corporation.

3. Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.08.2022, 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 one year and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- to the complainant. In default of payment of fine, he has been sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

4. After dismissal of the appeal by the learned First Appellate Court, the present revision petition has been preferred.

5. During the pendency of the present petition, the parties have settled the matter. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed application bearing Cr.MP No.1015 of 2025, for permitting the parties to compound the offence, on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties.

6. Statement of both the parties have been recorded, in which, they both have deposed that the dispute with regard to Cheque No.835711, dated 10.05.2016, has been settled between the parties.

7. Today, the accused is present before this Court. He has deposed that he has been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.08.2022.

8. Against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the petitioner had filed the appeal before the learned First Appellate Court and the learned First Appellate Court has also dismissed his appeal. Now, he is before this Court, in the present revision petition.

9. In addition to this, the accused has also submitted that during the pendency of the revision petition, the matter has been compromised between him and the complainant and he has also paid the entire amount of compensation, to the complainant.

10. The petitioner has also deposed that on the basis of the said compromise, the present petition may kindly be allowed, by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, referred to above, and he may kindly be acquitted of the charge.

11. In addition to this, the petitioner has also put forward the indigent circumstances, by stating that a lenient view may kindly be taken, in the matter of compounding fee.

12. On behalf of the respondent-Corporation, Ms. Shabnam Katoch, Legal Assistant has deposed that the petitioner has settled the matter regarding cheque No.835711, dated 10.05.2016, amount to Rs.90,000/-, with the respondent-Corporation and the respondent- Corporation has no objection, in case, the present petition is allowed and the accused is acquitted by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated03.08.2022.

13. On the basis of the statements, so made by the parties, one thing is clear that the matter has been settled between the parties.

14. Since, the matter, with regard to cheque, in question, has been settled between the parties, as such, the application, bearing Cr.MP No.1015 of 2025, is allowed and the parties are permitted to compound the offence.

15. Considering the fact that the application for compounding of the offence has been allowed, the present