JUDGMENT :

Manisha Batra, J. (Oral)

The instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence both dated 07.06.2017, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hoshiarpur in complaint bearing No. 581 dated 04.11.2014 titled as Satish Kumar Malhotra Vs. Gulshan Lal Dhawan, filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (For short, NI Act'), whereby the petitioner was held guilty for commission of offence punishable under the aforesaid Section and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two yeas and to pay compensation to the complainant/respondent No.2 to the tune of cheque amount i.e. Rs. 7,50,000/- within a period of two months of expiry of period prescribed for appeal. The petitioner has also laid challenge to the judgment dated 29.01.2025, passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, whereby the appeal of the petitioner had been dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the petitioner/accused was running a business of goldsmith under the name and style of Gulshan Jewelers'. He had obtained loan of Rs. 7,50,000/- from respondent No.2. The petitioner in order to discharge his legally enforceable debt, had issued a cheque for Rs. 7,50,000/-. However, on presentation of the said cheque by the complainant before its banker, the same was dishonoured with the remarks funds insufficient'. The petitioner was served with a legal notice on 30.09.2014 but he failed to make payment within the time stipulated. Aggrieved with the same, respondent No.2 filed the aforesaid complaint under Section 138 of NI Act, in which, the petitioner held guilty and sentenced as mentioned above. The appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by learned Appellate Court. Hence, the present revision petition. During the pendency of this petition, the sentence of the petitioner was suspended vide order dated 28.02.2025 and since then, he is on bail.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the petitioner and respondent No.2/complainant. In pursuance of the said settlement, the entire disputed amount has been given by the petitioner to the complainant. It is submitted that the complainant also admits the factum of the above stated settlement having been arrived between the parties and about receipt of entire disputed amount and therefore, he deserves to be granted permission to compound the offence.

4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant has affirmed the factum of receiving the entire disputed amount from the petitioner and has submitted that he has no objection, if the offence is compound in favour of the petitioner and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by learned trial Court and affirmed by learned Appellate Court are quashed and set aside.

5. Section 147 of NI Act makes all offences under this Act as compoundable offences. It is well settled proposition of law by now that in view of the provisions contained under this Section read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C., a compromise arrived inter se parties can be accepted and the offence committed under Section 138 of NI Act, can be ordered to be compounded even after conviction. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment dated 02.03.2022 pronounced by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Misc. (main) petition No. 107 of 2022 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. titled as Hiranand Shastri Vs. Ram Rattan Thakur and another, wherein it was observed that the judgment of conviction recorded under Section 138 of NI Act can be recalled, in view of the specific provisions contained under Section 147 of the Act, which provide for compounding of offence allegedly committed under Section 138 of NI Act. Similar proposition of law was laid down in the judgment dated 21.12.2021 in CRM-M-No. 2499-2021 in Geeta