IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-493-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision: 23.02.2026 Inderjit @ Inderjit Singh ....Petitioner Versus Jasbir Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY *****

Present : Mr. Mohan Singh Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. R.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate for the respondent *****

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

CRM-8274-2026 For the reasons mentioned the application, the same stands allowed. Delay of 373 days in filing the revision petition is hereby condoned.

CRR-493-2026 (O&M)

1. The challenge in the present criminal revision is to the order dated 11.02.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran, dismissing the appeal preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.11.2025 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khadur Sahib, vide which the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (for short, ‘the Act’) and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/-.

2. The facts relevant as narrated in the complaint filed under Section 138 of the NI Act are that the accused-petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- for his business purpose from the complainant and in discharge of his liability issued a cheque bearing No.882795 dated 02.09.2019, amounting to Rs.2,50,000/-, in favour of the complainant. However, on presentation thereof, the same was dishonoured and returned with the remarks “Funds Insufficient” vide memo dated 07.09.2019. Despite issuance of legal notice, the petitioner failed to make the payment within the stipulated period. The proceedings against him were initiated under Section 138 of the NI Act, pursuant to which, he appeared and was released on bail. On finding prima facie case under Section 138 of the NI Act, notice of accusation was served upon him, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

3. In order to prove its case, complainant-Jasbir Singh examined as CW 1. On closure of its evidence, statement of accused-petitioner under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded, he denied all the allegations raised against him and pleaded innocence. However, he did not produce any evidence in his defence.

4. After scrutinizing the evidence led by the parties, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the complainant has successfully proved his case against the petitioner-accused, and convicted and sentenced him, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years under Section 138 NI Act and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/- to the complainant. Aggrieved convict-petitioner filed appeal, which was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran vide impugned judgment dated 11.02.2025.

5. Hence, the present revision petition.

6. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been convicted in an offence under Section 138 NI Act, however, a compromise has now been arrived at between the parties, Annexure A-1, based on which CRM-8277-2026 has been filed under Section 147 of NI Act read with Section 401 of BNS for compounding the offence. As per the settlement, he has paid the entire amount to the complainant and the parties do not wish to pursue with the matter. He prays that the fee with regard to the same be waived off, in view of the poor financial condition of the petitioner. He has with great difficulty, managed to collect the money and settled the dispute as he wanted to put an end to the same, seven years having gone by. He further submits that the petitioner has not surrendered before the trial Court and prays for grant of exemption from surrendering, in this regard, reliance has been placed on the judgment of this Court in Harcharan Singh vs. State of Punjab, CRR-1704-2025, which was disposed of on 05.08.2025 by relying on the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Bihari Prasad Singh vs. The State of Bihar and Another, 2000 (10)

S.C.C. 346.

7. Learned counsel for respondent af