IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.
Lalit Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
Anil Verma - Respondent
CRR-2489 of 2025
Decided On : 01-04-2026
JUDGMENT :
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.
1. The instant revision petition has been filed against the impugned judgment of conviction dated 15.02.2023 and order of sentence dated 20.02.2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram vide which the petitioner had been convicted for commission of offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and had been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and has also been directed to pay a compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- i.e the cheque amount to the complainant and in default thereof to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
2. The appeal preferred by the petitioner against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence was also dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, vide judgment dated 12.03.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.170 of 2023. Aggrieved thereof, the instant petition has been filed.
3. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant have placed on record the original compromise deed alongwith cash receipt of Rs. 1,20,000/- and the same are taken on record as Mark ‘A’. The relevant part of the compromise deed is extracted as under:-
“This compromise has been executed at Gurugram on this 30th day of December, 2025 between Lalit Kumar S/o Rajender Prashad R/o H. No- 1759, Sector-4, Urban Estate, Gurugram at present 574/3 post office main chowk, Bijwasan Village- Delhi. (hereinafter called the "First party"), which expression shall include their representative, assignee, executors & administrator etc.
AND Anil Verma S/o Balbir Singh R/o H.No-628/22, Ward No. 21, Shivji Park, Gurugram (hereinafter called the "Second Party"), which expression shall include their representative, administrator, assignee, authorized signatory etc.
whereas, the First party discharge his legal liability towards the First Party, has issued cheque bearing No. 154405 dated 18.04.2016 of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) drawn on Axis Bank, Sector-14, Gurugram in favour of Second Party i.e. Anil Verma.
And Whereas the Second Party also served a legal notice and filed complaints which was decided vide case no. NACT/6269/2016 and Appeal CRA-170-2023 and also filed a Revision vide CRR/2489/2025 which was pending before the Hon'ble court of Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh to the first party for recover the aforesaid amount. In said dispute, now both the parties have arrived at a compromise amicably in the matter in following terms and conditions:-
Whereas both the parties agreed the following terms and condition of the compromise:-
1. That the first party has transfer through RTGS vide UTR bearing No. PUNBR52025123011191782 30.12.2025 of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) drawn on Punjab National Bank, Sector-4, Gurugram vide A/c No. 4785000300000522 issued in favour of Second Party (Anil Verma) and remaining Rs.1,20,000/- has been paid by cash as payment of full and final settlement amount. Total 3.70,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Seventy Thousands only)
2. That after encashment of aforesaid RTGS, Cash amount of full and final payment, the Second party shall not proceed any police complaints, court cases or legal remedies towards the first Party regarding aforesaid payment and cases and nothing is due towards the first party as the payment/claims/ and now there is no dispute in relation to outstanding dues and claims between the parties have fully and finally settled.
3. That now nothing dues are remaining towards each other and all the account has been settled with amicably and peaceful mind.
4. Thus, from a perusal of the above, it is evident that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved, However, Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the remaining payment shall be made within a period of 04 weeks of the receipt of certified copy of the order.
5. Counsel for the respondent/complainant, on instructions also does not dispute the aforesaid fact and thus
The judgment established the principle that the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC supported by Section 147 of the NIA can be invoked to quash proceedings based on ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.