##PAGE1##

$~8

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.REV.P. 1088/2018 & CRL.M.A. 49021/2018

SAGAR GUPTA .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Rohit Khanna and Mr. Sudhir

Batra, Advocates.

versus

AMIT SAINI .....Respondent

Through: Ms. Prerna Chaturwedi, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 23.12.2025

1. This revision petition under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973, “Cr.P.C.” is directed against order dated 26^th November, 2018,

passed by Special Judge (NDPS), South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi in

CA No. 287/2018, titled “Sagar Gupta v. Amit Saini”

2. Pursuant to trial in the complaint filed by the Respondent, the

Petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881, “NI Act” by judgement of conviction dated 17^th May, 2018.

By order on sentence dated 27^th June, 2018, he was sentenced to undergo

simple imprisonment for a period of 11 months and pay a fine of ₹3,50,000/,

of which ₹5,000/- were directed to be deposited with the DLSA and

₹3,45,000/ were to be paid to the Respondent as compensation. In default of

payment of compensation, the Petitioner was directed to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of 5 months.

3. In appeal, the conviction was upheld and order on sentence was partly

modified, reducing the substantive sentence was reduced to simple

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 21:50:29

imprisonment for a period of 3 months with the fine and the default sentence

unchanged.

4. During the pendency of these proceedings, parties have amicably

resolved all their disputes in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 23^rd

September, 2024, executed before the Delhi High Court Mediation and

Conciliation Centre. As per the agreed terms, the Petitioner has paid a total

settlement amount of ₹3,00,000/- to the Complainant in instalments over a

period of time.

5. The Complainant, who appears along with his counsel, acknowledges

receipt of the entire settlement amount and confirms that no further amount

remains due or payable by the Petitioner. He accordingly states that he has

no objection to the compounding of the offence.

6. The legal position on the issue of compounding of offences under 138

of the NI Act is now well-settled. Section 147 of the NI Act makes offences

under Section 138 compoundable, notwithstanding any provisions to the

contrary in Cr.P.C. The Supreme Court has consistently held that such

compounding can be permitted at any stage of the proceedings, including

after conviction.³ The continuation of criminal proceedings after the

grievance of the complainant has been addressed would serve no meaningful

purpose.

7. In Damodar S. Prabhu, the Supreme Court laid down guidelines for

imposing costs while allowing compounding at various stages, with the aim

of discouraging delayed settlements and preventing misuse of the process.

Subsequently, in its recent decision in Sanjabji Tari v. Kishore S. Borcar &

3 Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663; K.M. Ibrahim v. K.P. Mohammed (2010) 1

SCC 798; O.P. Dholakia v. State of Haryana (2000) 1 SCC 762.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 21:50:29

Anr,, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2069. taking note of the substantial pendency of cheque dishonour cases

across the country and the decline in prevailing interest rates, the Supreme

Court modified the earlier guidelines in Damodar S. Prabhu regarding the

quantum of costs to be imposed at the stage of compounding.

8. Ordinarily costs equivalent to 7.5% of the cheque amount must be

imposed at the time of compounding. However, the Court is vested with the

discretion to reduce the costs, depending on the specific circumstances of

the case.