Between vs Hardeep Thakur
2021 Latest Caselaw 3945 HP

            IN      THE       HIGH       COURT OF           HIMACHAL                PRADESH,
                                                SHIMLA
                           ON THE 16th DAY OF AUGUST, 2021




                                                                                .
                                                BEFORE





                      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

                           CRIMINAL REVISION NO.146 OF 2021





    Between:
    HARDEEP THAKUR, SON OF
    SHRI     SURJAN      SINGH,





    RESIDENT    OF     VILLAGE
    SAMOLI,    POST     OFFICE
    SAMOLI,   TEHSIL    ROHRU,
    DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P.
                            r                                                 ....PETITIONER.

    (BY. SHRI PARVEEN CHANDEL, ADVOCATE)

    AND

    PARMOD THAKUR, SON OF


    LATE SHRI GOPAL SINGH
    THAKUR,   RESIDENT   OF
    VILLAGE  ARAHAL,   POST




    OFFICE ARAHAL, TEHSIL
    ROHRU, DISTRICT SHIMLA,
    H.P.





                                                                ....RESPONDENT/STATE.
    (BY. MS. SHASHI KIRAN, ADVOCATE)





    Whether approved for reporting?1 No

                 This Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:

                                            JUDGMENT

By way of this revision petition, the petitioner has challenged

judgment, dated 28.05.2018, passed by the Court of learned

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Rohru, District

Shimla, H.P., in Criminal Case No.84-3 of 2016, titled as Pramod

.

Thakur Versus Hardeep Thakur, which criminal case stood disposed

of by the learned Trial Court by sentencing the present petitioner to

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one six months and

also to pay Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant, as

well as judgment dated 16.09.2020, passed by the Court of

learned Sessions Judge (Forests), Shimla, H.P., vide which, the

judgment passed by learned Trial Court was upheld by the learned

Appellate Court and the appeal filed by the present petitioner

against the judgment passed by learned Trial Court was dismissed.

2. The Court stands informed that during the pendency of

the revision petition, the matter has been amicably settled between

the petitioner and the respondent and the entire due amount stands

paid by the petitioner to the respondent. This fact is not disputed by

learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits in view of

said development, it will be in the interest in case this Court

exercises its power of compounding the offence in terms of the

judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Damodar S. Prabhu

vs. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 Supreme Court Cases 663. He further

submits that as the petitioner has made good the amount due to the

respondent, it will be in the interest of justice, in case in terms of

para 25 of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India (supra),

the compounding fee of 10% of the cheque amount is modified taking

.

into consideration the peculiar facts of the case and the financial

condition of the petitioner. He assures the Court that in case the

offence is compounded by this Court, then the compounding fee

shall be paid by the petitioner within the time so granted by the

Court.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

taking into consideration the fact that the matter which led to filing

of the criminal case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act, now stands settled between the parties, this Court orders the

compounding of the offence in question, subject to the payment of

10% of the cheque amount as compounding fee by the petitioner,

which shall be deposited by the petitioner with State Legal Services

Authority, Shimla within a period of eight weeks from today.

Sentence passed by learned Courts below stands quashed and set

aside. Let a compliance affidavit in this regard be thereafter filed by

the petitioner with the Registrar (Judicial).

5. On an application, which may be filed by the parties

before the learned Trial Court, the amount in terms of the

compromise entered into between them, copy whereof shall be

appended with the, be released in favour of the parties, in their bank

accounts with up-to-date interest.

The petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also

pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

.

    August 16, 2021                                 (Ajay Mohan Goel)
         (rishi)                                           Judge





                      r          to