[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Himachal Pradesh High Court
Hansa Devi vs Diwakar Dutt on 24 February, 2026
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Criminal Revision No.763 of 2024
Date of Decision: 24.2.2026
.
_____________________________________________________________________
Hansa Devi
.........Petitioner
Versus
Diwakar Dutt
.......Respondent
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
of
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioner: Ms. Yogita Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Naveen K.
Dass, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Ms. Shikha Chauhan, Advocate.
___________________________________________________________________________
rt
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Instant criminal revision petition, lays challenge to judgment
dated 28.8.2024, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, District
Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No. RBT 79-S/10 of
2024/22, affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
23.7.2022/1.8.2022, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class-
7, Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in Complaint Case No.119-3
of 2018/17, whereby the learned trial Court while holding the petitioner-
accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138
of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short the "Act"), convicted and
sentenced her to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month
and pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,30,000/- to the respondent-
complainant (herein after referred to as the "complainant" ).
.
2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are
that complainant instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Act, in
the competent court of law, alleging therein that accused with a view to
discharge her liability issued cheque amounting to Rs. 4,00,000/- in favour
of
of the complainant, but fact remains that the aforesaid cheque on its
presentation, was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. Since
accused failed to make the payment good within the time stipulated in the
rt
legal notice, respondent/complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings
before the competent Court of law under Section 138 of the Act.
3. Learned trial Court on the basis of pleadings as well as
evidence adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment/order
dated 23.7.2022/1.8.2022, held the petitioner-accused guilty of having
committed offence under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly, sentenced
him as per the description given herein above.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of
conviction recorded by the court below, accused preferred an appeal before
learned First Appellate Court, which also came to be dismissed vide
judgment 28.8.2024, as a consequence of which, judgment of conviction
recorded by the learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid
background, present petitioner-accused has approached this Court by way
of instant proceedings, seeking therein her acquittal after setting aside the
.
judgments of conviction recorded by the courts below.
5. Vide order dated 21.11.2024, this Court suspended the
substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial Court subject to
applicant's depositing 50% of the compensation amount before the trial
of
court within four weeks. Only 20% of the compensation amount was
deposited, but today during proceedings of the case, learned counsel
representing the respondent-complainant on instructions states that he
rt
has received the entire amount of compensation and as such, has no
objection in case offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner is
ordered to be compounded while exercising power under Section 147 of the
Act.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that though she has
no specific information with regard to compromise, if any, arrived inter-se
parties but once respondent-complainant himself has stated that he has
received the entire amount of compensation, this Court may proceed to
pass appropriate orders.
7. Having taken note of the fact that entire amount of
compensation stands received by the respondent-complainant, coupled
with the fact that and he has no objection in compounding the offence, this
Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the
petitioner for compounding of offence while exercising power under Section
.
147 of the Act as well as in terms of guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in Damodar S. Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663,
wherein it has been categorically held that court, while exercising power
under Section 147 of the Act, can proceed to compound the offence even
of
after recording of conviction.
8. Consequently, in view of the above, present matter is ordered to
be compounded and impugned judgments of conviction and sentence dated
rt
23.7.2022/1.8.2022 and 28.8.2024, passed by the courts below are
quashed and set-aside and the petitioner-accused is acquitted of the charge
framed against her under Section 138 of the Act. Interim order, if any, is
vacated. Bail bonds, if any, are discharged. Petitioner shall also be liable to
pay 5% of the cheque amount as compounding fee with the Himachal Pradesh
State Legal Services Authority, within a period of six weeks. It is made clear
that in case, needful is not done within the time stipulated by this court,
accused besides rendering himself liable for penal consequences would also
invite contempt proceedings. The petition is disposed of alongwith pending
applications, if any.
February 24, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma),
(manjit) Judge
