IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

111+293 CRA-AS-82-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 11.08.2025 The Primary Cooperative Agriculture Development Bank Ltd. ...Petitioner Versus Darshan Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Ajit Singh Sodhi, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Ishan Gupta, Advocate for the respondent.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

1. CRM-28278-2025 Prayer in this application is for compounding the offence in view of the fact that the parties have amicably settled their dispute.

Since the prayer made in this application has direct bearing on the main revision petition, the application is disposed of and let the main case, which is also listed today, be taken up.

2. CRA-AS-82-2025 (O&M)

Vide judgment dated 14.05.2025, the present appeal was allowed and the respondent/accused was held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘N. I. Act’). Thereafter, the appeal was listed for pronouncing the quantum of sentence. In the meanwhile, the respondent/accused has moved the aforesaid application, thereby submitting that the offence may be compounded as the matter stands amicably settled between the parties.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the respondent/accused that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the appellant and the respondent. In pursuance of the said settlement, the entire disputed amount has been given by the respondent to the appellant/Bank. It is submitted that the appellant also admits the factum of the above stated settlement having been arrived between the parties and about receipt of entire disputed amount and therefore, he deserves to be granted permission to compound the offence.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has affirmed the factum of receiving the entire disputed amount from the respondent and has submitted that he has no objection if the offence is compounded in favour of the respondent.

5. Section 147 of N. I. Act makes all offences under this Act as compoundable offences. It is well settled proposition of law by now that in view of the provisions contained under this Section read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C., a compromise arrived inter se parties can be accepted and the offence committed under Section 138 of N. I. Act, can be ordered to be compounded even after conviction. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment dated 02.03.2022 pronounced by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Misc. (main) petition No. 107 of 2022 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. titled as Hiranand Shastri Vs. Ram Rattan Thakur and another, wherein it was observed that the judgment of conviction recorded under Section 138 of N. I. Act can be recalled, in view of the specific provisions contained under Section 147 of the Act, which provide for compounding of offence allegedly committed under Section 138 of N.I. Act. Similar proposition of law was laid down in the judgment dated 21.12.2021 in CRM-M-No. 2499-2021 in Geeta Devi Vs. Surinder Singh and another’, wherein it was observed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh that the Court has ample powers under Section 147 of N.I. Act to compound the offence in those cases, where the accused already stands convicted. Reference can also be made to the authority cited as Sube Singh and another vs. State of Haryana and another, 2013 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 102, wherein a Division Bench of this Court has held that even after the conviction, if the parties have settled the dispute amicably and have decided to live in peace and harmony, this Court, in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., can compound the offence.

6. In Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed babalal H. 2010(2) RCR (Criminal) 851, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had laid down several guidelines with regard to the proceedings conducted in connection with complaints filed under Section 138 of NI Act. It was observed that the interest of the complainant lied primarily in recoveri