IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 15.10.2025 RAJENDER KUMAR ......Petitioner VERSUS SANDEEP SINGH AND ANOTHER .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ *****

Present: - Mr. Arun Singal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Dr. (Ms.) Malvika Singh, DAG, Haryana.

Respondent No.2-Sandeep Singh (in person).

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

CRM-40800-2025 The instant application has been filed for seeking preponement of the date of hearing in the main petition, which is otherwise fixed for 28.10.2025. The application is supported by an affidavit of Sandeep son of Raj Singh, resident of House No.810/9, Shiv Colony, Street No.6, Sonipat.

In view of the averments made in the application, the same is allowed as prayed for. The main case is preponed from 28.10.2025 and taken on Board of this Court for hearing today itself.

CRM-40801-2025 and CRR-1775-2025

1. The instant revision petition has been filed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.12.2018/18.12.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sonepat vide which the petitioner(s) has/have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the impugned judgment dated 02.07.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sonipat vide which appeal preferred by the petitioner(s)

has/have been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that after filing of the instant petition, the matter has been amicably resolved between the parties and entire due amount stands paid by the petitioner. Affidavit executed by the respondent-Sandeep is at Annexure P-1. He thus prays that the case in hand be permitted to be compounded as per Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The relevant provisions of the Act reads thus:-

“147 Offences to be compoundable.

Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable.”

3. Mr. Sandeep Singh, respondent No.1 (in person) appears has acknowledged that the entire amount already stands remitted and made a separate statement in this behalf in the Court today which is Mark ‘X’ and that he has no objection to the offence being compounded under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

4. The issue regarding compounding under the Negotiable Instruments Act at the stage of appeal as well as revision has come before this court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and they have upheld that the powers under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be invoked at any stage of the proceedings i.e. at the stage of trial, appeal or at the revisional jurisdiction and that the courts should be liberal in exercising such powers.

5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of K.M. Ibrahim Vs. K.P Mohammed & Another, passed in Criminal Appeal No.2281 of 2009 decided on 02.12.2009 held as under:-

“5. Appearing for the appellant, Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, learned Senior Advocate, contended that since a specific power had been given to the parties to a proceeding under the Negotiable Instruments Act under Section 147 to compound the offence, there could be no reason as to why the same cannot be permitted even after conviction, which had been affirmed upto the High Court. It was urged that in order to facilitate settlement of disputes, the legislature thought it fit to insert Section 147 by Amending Act 55 of 2002. Such amendment came into effect from 6th February, 2003, and provided that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, every offence punishable under the Act would be compoundable.

6. Mr. Rohtagi urged that in view of the nonobstante clause, the provisions of Section 147 were given an overriding effect over the Code and in view of the clear mandate given to the parties to compound an offence under the Act, refe