SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 1517

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SMT. MANJEET – Appellant
Versus
LAL SINGH – Respondent



##PAGE1##

CRR-1706-2024 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CRR-1706-2024 (O&M)

Smt. Manjeet …....Petitioner(s).

Versus

Lal Singh …....Respondent(s).

Judgment Judgment Operative Part Uploaded on

reserved on pronounced on Pronounced or full

19.01.2026 03.02.2026 Fully pronounced 03.02.2026

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA,

Present: Ms. Archana Chauhan, Advocate for

Ms. Vasundhra Asija, Advocate

for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Mohan Singh Rana, Advocate

for the respondent.

***

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

Criminal CIS No. NIA-116 of 2017 under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Complaint Instruments Act read with Section 420 IPC.

Date of decision: 24.01.2024.

Criminal CIS/CRA-101 of 2024 (CRA-25 of 2024)

Appeal

Date of decision: 16.08.2024.

Convict’s Penal provision Sentence

name

Smt. S. 138 of the Negotiable Simple imprisonment for one year and to pay

Manjeet Instruments Act, 1881 compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- to the

complainant.

1. This revision petition has arisen out of judgment dated 16.08.2024

passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, vide which the judgment of

conviction dated 24.01.2024 and order of sentence dated 03.02.2024 passed by learned

Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sohana in CIS No.NIA-116 of 2017 have been upheld,

1

1 of 3

::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 02:50:53 :::

##PAGE2##

CRR-1706-2024 (O&M)

whereby the petitioner-accused was held guilty for offence under Section 138 of

Negotiable Instruments Act and was convicted and sentenced, as stated above.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that an amicable settlement has

arrived at between the parties and the respondent-complainant has received the amount

of settlement from the petitioner and therefore, prayed for compounding of offence

under Section 138 of N.I. Act and acceptance of the revision petition.

3. Learned counsel representing the complainant/respondent has admitted

the factum of compromise between the parties and handed over affidavit dated

02.12.2025 of complainant Lal Singh, which is taken on record. He further submits

that he has specific instructions from the complainant/respondent that they have no

objection in case the revision petition is allowed and the petitioner is acquitted and the

judgment of conviction and order of sentence are set aside.

4. I have heard counsel for the parties and have perused the relevant

material placed on record.

5. As submitted by counsel for the petitioner, during the course of

proceedings, a settlement was effected between the parties and full and final settlement

has taken place. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that disputed

cheque(s) amount has already been paid by the petitioner to respondent and now,

nothing is due towards him, which is conceded by learned counsel for the respondent.

6. The object and purpose of proceeding initiated under the Negotiable

Instruments Act is to provide a compensatory mechanism for expeditious recovery of

money and not just punishing the offender, which is a secondary concern.

7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Meters and Instruments Private

Limited and another Vs. Kanchan Mehta (2018) 1 SCC 560, has held as under:-

“7. This Court has noted that the object of the statute was to facilitate

smooth functioning of business transactions. The provision is necessary

as in many transactions’ cheques were issued merely as a device

to defraud the creditors. Dishonour of cheque causes incalculable

loss, injury and inconvenience to the Vide the Banking, Public

Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Laws

2

2 of 3

::: Downloaded on - 10-02-2026 02:50:53 :::

##PAGE3##

CRR-1706-2024 (O&M)

(Amendment) Act, 1988 payee and credibility of business transactions

suffers a setback. At the same time, it was also noted that nature of

offence under Section 138 primarily related to a civil wrong and the

2002 amendment specifically made it compoundable…...

xxxx xxxx xxxx

18.2. The object of the provision being primarily compensatory,

punitive element being mainly with the object of enforcing the

compensatory element, compounding at

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top