##PAGE1##

2026:HHC:16745

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr.MP No.1822 of 2026 in Cr.R. No.410 of 2023

Date of Decision: 13.05.2026

_____________________________________________________________________

Birbal Guleria ……...Applicant/Petitioner

Versus

Hans Raj and Another …....Non-applicants/Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioner: Mr. Jagan Nath, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate, for respondent

No.1.

Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar,

Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi

Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy

Advocates General, for State.

_________________________________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

By way of instant application filed under Section 147 of

Negotiable Instruments Act, prayer has been made by the applicant-

accused for compounding of offence alleged to have been committed under

Section 138 of the Act.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are

that non-applicant/respondent/complainant (for short ‘complainant’)

filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for

short ‘Act’) in the competent court of law, alleging therein that accused

with a view to discharge his liability, issued Cheque bearing No.000598

dated 09.12.2019, amounting to ₹5,00,000/- drawn on ICICI Bank,

however, afore Cheque on its presentation to the Bank concerned, the

same was dishonoured with the remarks “Funds Insufficient”. After receipt

of aforesaid return memo, complainant served accused with a legal notice,

2026:HHC:16745

2

however, since petitioner-accused failed to make the payment good within

the time stipulated in the legal notice, respondent/complainant was

compelled to initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Act in the Court

of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Sunder Nagar,

District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh.

3. Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record

by the respective parties, vide judgment/order dated

29.06.2022/14.07.2022, held the petitioner-accused guilty of having

committed offence under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, convicted

and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five

months and pay compensation to the tune of ₹6,50,000/- to the

respondent-complainant.

4. Though, at the first instance, accused preferred an appeal in

the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sunder Nagar, District

Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, however, same was dismissed vide judgment

dated 26.11.2022. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid

judgment passed by learned first appellate Court, applicant-accused

preferred Criminal Revision No.410 of 2023 in this Court, which also came

to be dismissed vide judgment dated 27.04.2026.

5. Since after passing of aforesaid judgment dated 27.04.2026,

applicant-accused compromised the matter with the complainant, whereby

accused has paid sum of ₹5,00,000/-, as full and final settlement, to the

complainant, applicant-accused has approached this Court in the instant

2026:HHC:16745

3

application praying therein for compounding of the offence under Section

147 of the Act.

6. Respondent No.1/complainant has come present in person and

is being represented by Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate. He states on oath that

he of his own volition and without there being any external has entered

into compromise with the petitioner-accused, whereby they have resolved

to settle the dispute for a sum of ₹5,00,000/-. He states that since he has

received the afore amount, as full and final settlement, he shall have no

objection in case the judgments of conviction passed by the learned Court

below are quashed and set aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the

charges framed against him. His statement made on oath is taken on

record.

7. While considering the prayer made in the application, the

question which needs to be decided at first instance is that “whether after

upholding the judgment of conviction and orde