##PAGE1##

CRR-683-2026 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

132 CRR-683-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision: 23.03.2026

DEVENDER SINGH .... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present: Mr. Pardeep Balyan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Viney Phogat, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. R.K. Poonia, Advocate with Ms. Baljeet Kaur Bhardwaj, Adocate and

Mr. Supreet, Advocate for respondent No.2.

****

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)

CRM-12062-2026 This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 is

for early hearing of the application bearing No.11206 of 2016 in main

case i.e. CRR No.683 of 2026.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is

allowed and the main case is taken on board today itself.

CRM-12063-2026 This is an application filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023

(482 Cr.P.C) for compounding of the offence in view of the fact that the

matter has been compromised between the parties.

Allowed as prayed for subject to all just exceptions.

CRR-683-2026 KUSUM

2026.03.25 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh

CRR-683-2026 (O&M) 2 2. The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 27.02.2026 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat vide which the appeal preferred by the accused-petitioner against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.09.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sonepat has been

dismissed.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the accused-petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from the complainant/respondent No.2 with an assurance to return the same in near future. In order to discharge his liability, the accused-petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.007526 dated 02.09.2016 for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- drawn at Axis Bank Limited, Sonipat in favour of the complainant-respondent No.2 which came to be dishonoured. Pursuant thereto, the accused came to be summoned under the provisions of the 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act, 1881 vide order dated 04.10.2016.

4. The evidence was led and ultimately, the accused/petitioner was held guilty and accordingly, convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months along with

compensation equivalent to the cheque amount.

5. Aggrieved against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the accused/petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat which came to be dismissed vide a

judgment dated 27.02.2026.

6. Still aggrieved, the present revision petition has been KUSUM

2026.03.25 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh

CRR-683-2026 (O&M) 3

preferred by the accused-petitioner.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that during the pendency of the present petition, a compromise has been effected between the parties on 16.03.2026 (Annexure-A/2). As agreed, a cheque for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- has been handed over to the learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 as full and final payment. Thus, nothing remains due towards the complainant-respondent No.2. He further contends that in view of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 320 Cr.P.C. where a settlement has been effected, the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be compounded on account of the fact that a mutual

compromise has been effected between the parties.

8. The learned counsel for the State-respondent No.1 and the counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 contend that as the matter has been settled between the parties, they have no objection if the prayer of the learned counsel for accused-petitioner for compounding the offence under Section 138 N.I. Act is allowed and the petitioner is

acquitted of the charges framed against him.

9. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

10.