IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

111 CRR-1230-2026 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 08.05.2026 DHOLA MAHI ....PETITIONER Versus DES RAJ AND ANR .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL.

Present: Mr. H.S.Batth, Advocate for the petitioner.

H.S.GREWAL , J (ORAL)

CRM-20233-2026 This application has been filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 1093 days for filing the present case.

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and delay of 1093 days in filing the present case is condoned.

CRM-20234-2026 This application has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS (482 Cr.P.C) for placing on record copy of the order dated 21.08.2023 passed by this Court as Annexure P-1 and compromise effected between the petitioner and complainant as Annexure P-2.

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and Annexure P-1 and P-2 are ordered to be taken on record.

CRM-20236-2026 and CRR-1230-2026

1. The petitioner has filed the present revision petition against the impugned judgment dated 22.08.2019 passed by ld. SDJM, Guruharsahai District Ferozepur whereby, the petitioner has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 02 years and to pay Rs. 5000/- as fine and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for period of one month and against the judgment dated 07.02.2023 passed by ld. Addl.Sessions Judge, Ferozepur whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

2. Along with the main petition, the petitioner had filed an application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 482 Cr.P.C (Section 528 of B.N.S.S) with a prayer to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Act.

₹

3. Brief facts of the case is that the accused borrowed 4,00,000/- from the complainant on 01.03.2014 and agreed to repay the same. Despite repeated requests, the accused failed to return the amount and ultimately ₹

agreed on 31.07.2016 to pay 1,74,000/- towards interest along with the ₹

principal amount, thereby making the total liability 5,74,000/-. In discharge of the said liability, the accused issued cheque No. 262305 dated 01.08.2016 ₹

for 5,70,000/- drawn on Punjab & Sind Bank, Golu Ka Maur Branch. However, the cheque was dishonoured vide memo dated 01.08.2016 with the remarks “Funds Insufficient”. Thereafter, legal notice dated 03.08.2016 was served upon the accused, but despite service of notice, payment was not made. Hence, the present complaint.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that compromise has been effected between the parties and entire amount has been paid to the complainant. Prayer has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petition may be allowed.

5. Notice of motion.

6. Mr. P.S.Pandher, Assistant AG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

7. Mr. Divyansh Vats, Advocate appears and has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent No.1 in the Court today and the same is taken on record. He further submits that he has no objection if the offence punishable under Section 138 NI Act is compounded and the petitioner may be acquitted.

8. It is settled law that the proceedings initiated under Section 138 of the NI Act are quasi-criminal in nature and the object and purpose of this enactment is to provide a compensatory mechanism for expeditious recovery of money as opposed to punishing the accused. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in R. Vijayan Vs. Baby (2012) 1 SCC 260 has considered the said issue and come to the conclusion that punishing the offender is secondary concern.

9. The amendment carried out in the year 2002 in the NI Act intended to make the nature of offence under Section 138 of the NI Act as a civil wrong while making it compoundable. A two Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Meters and Instruments Private Limited and another Vs. Kanchan Meh