IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. Revision No. 673 of 2025

Decided on: 05.12.2025

_______________________________________________ Paras Ram ....Petitioner

Versus

Ravi Kumar & another …Respondents

Coram

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.

1

Whether approved for reporting?

For the petitioner: Mr. Inder Sharma, Advocate.

For respondent No. 1: Mr. Surila Sangam, Advocate.

For respondent No. 2/State: Mr. Ankush Thakur, Deputy

Advocate General.

________________________________________________

Sushil Kukreja, Judge (oral)

The instant petition has been filed by the

petitioner-accused under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) against judgment, dated 29.07.2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushehar, District Shimla, H.P., in CIS Regd. No. 118 of 2024, whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 03.07.2024, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anni, District Kullu, H.P., in CIS Case No. 178 of

2020, was affirmed.

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. The brief facts, giving rise to the present petition, can succinctly be summarized as under:

3. In the year 2019, Accused-Paras Ram, purchased vehicle, bearing registration No. HP-01A-1583, from complainant-Ravi Kumar and made part payment of the consideration amount and for the remaining amount of Rs.40,000/- he issued a post dated cheque, bearing No. 012091, amounting to Rs.40,000/-, dated 04.04.2020, in favour of complainant. However, the aforesaid cheque, on being presented for encashment, was dishonoured with remarks “insufficient funds”. Therefore, the complainant issued a legal notice to the accused, but he failed to pay the aforesaid amount to the complainant. Resultantly, the complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short “the Act”) before the learned Trial Court.

4. The learned Trial Court after conclusion of the trial convicted the accused under Section 138 of the Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay compensation of Rs.80,000/- to the complainant and in default of payment of compensation amount the accused/convict was ordered to undergo further simple imprisonment for six months.

5. Being dissatisfied, the accused/petitioner/convict preferred an appeal before the learned Lower Appellate Court, which was dismissed, vide judgment dated 29.07.2025, and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 03.07.2024, passed by the learned Trial Court, was affirmed. Hence, accused/petitioner/convict- Paras Ram preferred the instant petition under Section 438 of BNSS with a prayer that his petition be allowed and the impugned judgments and order of sentence passed by the learned Courts below be set-aside and he be acquitted.

6. During the pendency of the instant petition, an application (Cr.MP No. 5369 of 2025) under Section 147 of the Act read with Section 528 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner-accused seeking permission of this Court to compound the offence on the basis of compromise by setting-aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 03.07.2024, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Anni, District Kullu, H.P., which was affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, H.P., vide judgment, dated

29.07.2025, in CIS Case Regd. No. 118 of 2024.

7. Today, complainant-Shri Ravi Kumar, is present before this Court and his statement has been recorded and separately placed on the file.

8. Complainant-Shri Ravi Kumar in his statement stated that on a complaint instituted by him under Section 138 of the Act, the petitioner (accused) was convicted by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anni, District Kullu, H.P., vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 03.07.2024, which was further affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Kinnaur at R