Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sh. Dhalu Ram vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 5127 HP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 5127 HP
Judgement Date : 30 October, 2021

Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sh. Dhalu Ram vs Unknown on 30 October, 2021
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                       ON THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021

                                    BEFORE




                                                                .
                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR





                         CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3 of 2021





BETWEEN:-

    SH. DHALU RAM, S/O SH.LOT
    RAM, R/O VILLAGE SHURU,
    P.O. PRINI, TEHSIL MANALI,





    DISTRICT KULLU, H.P.                                          ....PETITIONER

    (PETITIONER PRESENT IN
    PERSON)

    (BY SH. MAHENDER SINGH KANWAR, ADVOCATE)

     AND

    SH.PIAR SINGH GULERIA, S/O


    SH.NATHU RAM, R/O V.P.O.
    BHUNTAR, TEHSIL BHUNTAR,
    DISTRICT KULLU, H.P.                                    ....RESPONDENTS




    (RESPONDENT IN PERSON.)





    Whether approved for reporting?

                 This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed





the following:
                                JUDGMENT

Present Revision Petition has been filed assailing judgment,

dated 21.9.2020, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu,

Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2019, whereby

judgment/order dated 26.10.2012/31.10.2019, passed by learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P. in Cr. Complaint No. 373-1

of 2013, convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused under Section

138 of Negotiable Instruments Act to undergo simple imprisonment for

four months and to pay compensation of `2,10,000/- to the complainant,

has been affirmed.

2. Complainant/respondent is present in the Court today and

his statement has been recorded on oath, wherein he has stated that

matter has been amicably settled with the accused/petitioner and as per

.

compromise, he has agreed to withdraw the complaint for compounding

the case on accepting payment of `1,00,000/- against payment of

`2,10,000/- and thus he has prayed for compounding the case. He has

further deposed that he is deposing in this Court out of his free will,

consent and also without any external pressure, coercion or threat of

any kind. r

3. Petitioner/accused is also present in the Court today and his

statement has been recorded on oath, wherein he has endorsed the

statement of complainant to be true and correct. He has further stated

that because of loss in business, he could not arrange the payment of

entire amount of compensation and considering his financial condition,

complainant/respondent has agreed for compounding the case by

accepting `1,00,000/-, instead of `2,10,000/- and for his poor financial

condition, he is also not in a position to pay compounding fee. He has

further deposed that he is deposing in this Court out of his free will,

consent and also without any external pressure, coercion or threat of

any kind.

4. Consequently, respondent/complainant is permitted to

withdraw the complaint and matter is compounded and complaint arising

out of dishonor of cheque, under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, is treated to be withdrawn and judgments of conviction

and sentence passed by the Courts below are quashed and set aside.

Petitioner-accused is acquitted of the accusation framed against him.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for exemption

of compounding fee on the ground that due to poor financial condition,

petitioner could not pay the amount well in time and now he has

.

arranged the money from his nears and dears and paid the same to

respondent. It is also submitted by him that considering the ratio of law

laid down by the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal

H. 2010 (5) SCC 663 as clarified by the Apex Court in Madhya Pradesh

State Legal Services Authority Vs. Prateek Jain and another 2014

(10) SCC 690, a lenient view be taken and the petitioner be exempted

from payment of compounding fee.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,

petitioner/accused is exempted from payment of compounding fee.

7. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also

the pending application(s), if any.

8. Parties are permitted to use downloaded copy from the High

Court website for depositing the compounding fee with the H.P. Legal

Services Authority, Shimla and for other purposes also. Concerned

authority shall not insist for certified copy. Passing of order may be

verified from High Court website.

Copy Dasti.

                                             (Vivek Singh Thakur),
     th
30 October, 2021                                    Judge.
          (Keshav)





 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter