IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.124 CRR-416-2026 (O&M) Decided on : 16.02.2026 Ashruppi Bisht ...... Petitioner Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and another ...... Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL ***

Present : Mr. Birinder Pal Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Alankrit Bhardwaj, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondent(s)-UT, Chandigarh.

Mr. Ribhav Singla, Advocate for respondent No.2.

***

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL , J (ORAL)

CRM-6971-2026 Through this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, a prayer has been made to condone the delay of 193 days in filing the criminal revision petition.

Heard. For the reasons, mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Delay of 193 days in filing the criminal revision petition is condoned.

CRM-6972-2026 in/and CRR-416-2026 (O&M)

1. Applicant/petitioner-Ashruppi Bisht has filed the instant application/petition for quashing of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.08.2019, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh whereby she has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 06 months for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act') and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- i.e. double the cheque amount within two months and in default of payment of compensation amount to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 01 month as also the judgment dated 03.05.2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide which the appeal of the petitioner against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.08.2019 has been dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner issued a cheque of an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to discharge her legal liability in favour of respondent No.2-complainant and the said cheque was dishonoured vide memo dated 12.07.2017 with remarks “Funds Insufficient”.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner averred that after dismissing of the appeal filed by the petitioner, both the parties compromised the matter vide compromise deed dated 18.12.2025; the petitioner paid an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- as full and final settlement of the dispute and the complainant has undertaken not to claim compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- as awarded by the Court. He further submits that the petitioner is a married lady having four daughters, youngest being a minor, and incarceration of the petitioner is causing immense hardship to her family especially to her daughters. She further submits that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is essentially a civil wrong given the colour of criminal offence and once the dispute has been amicably settled and the complainant has received a substantial amount in full and final settlement, the very foundation of the complaint ceases to exist. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that both the aforesaid judgments passed by the Courts below be set aside and the petitioner be acquitted of the charge(s) levelled against her.

5. The petitioner has also filed an application under Section 147 of the Act, seeking permission from this Court to compound the offence and to acquit her of the charges under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-UT, Chandigarh submits that this is a complaint case and he is not aware of any compromise effected between the parties.

6. Ms. Chahat Bhandari, Advocate has appeared and filed power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.2. The same is taken on record. She submits that the matter has been compromised, the amount stands paid and she has no objection, if the present application is allowed.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment in the case of Tilak Kataria vs. State of Haryana and another, 2021 (3) RCR (Criminal) 40