[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Sansaro Devi vs Vikram Singh on 12 February, 2026

                                      ( 2026:HHC:3483 )




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                            Cr. Revision No. 97 of 2026
                                            Date of Decision: 12.02.2026

    Sansaro Devi                                                             ...Petitioner.

                                         Versus
    Vikram Singh                                                             ..Respondent.

    Coram
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Vacation Judge.
                                     1
    Whether approved for reporting?

    For the petitioner:                  Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate.
    For the respondent:                  Ms. Kalaunta, Devi, Advocate.

    Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral)

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner

against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

04.07.2025, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P. in case No. 93-III/2022,

titled Vikram Singh vs. Sansaro Devi, as affirmed by learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P., in Cr.

Appeal No. 16-G/IX/2025, titled Sansaro Devi vs. Vikram Singh,

decided on 29.11.2025, whereby present petitioner has been

sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of two years for

commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I.Act

and compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- was awarded against her.

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2 ( 2026:HHC:3483 )

2. The petitioner alongwith present revision petition filed

an application under Section 147 of the N.I.Act on the basis of the

compromise arrived between the parties. The compromise deed

dated 04.02.2026 is signed by son of the present petitioner,

namely, Mr. Rajinder Kumar and respondent. The same has been

placed on record as Annexure A-1. As per the terms of

compromise deed, entire cheque and compensation amount

stands paid to the respondent by the son of the petitioner.

3. It has further been averred that present respondent

has no objection, if the present petition is allowed and the

judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.07.2025,

passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra,

District Kangra, H.P. in Case No. 93-III/2022, titled Vikram Singh

vs. Sansaro Devi, as affirmed by learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P., in Cr. Appeal No. 16-

G/IX/2025, titled Sansaro Devi vs. Vikram Singh, decided on

29.11.2025, are quashed and set-aside and have further no

objection, if the present petitioner, who is presently undergoing

sentence at Lala Lajpat Rai, District & Open Air Correctional

Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. is released.

4. Vide separate statements of the parties, it has been

agreed by both the parties that in order to maintain harmony they

have compromised the matter and the present petitioner through 3 ( 2026:HHC:3483 )

her son has paid the entire amount of cheque /compensation

amount to the respondent-complainant, which has been

acknowledged by the complainant in the compromise deed.

5. The compromise deed has been duly signed by the

complainant and by son of the present petitioner and one of the

witness namely, Sh. Raman Kumar, Advocate, Dehra, District

Kangra, H.P. submits that both the parties have prayed to settle

the matter amongst them.

6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the

present case, and particularly in view of the compromise effected

between the parties, which is evident from the record, supported

by the statements made by the parties, this Court deems it fit that

the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, District

Kangra, H.P. in case No. 93-III/2022, titled Vikram Singh vs.

Sansaro Devi, as affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Dehra, District Kangra, H.P., in Cr. Appeal No. 16-G/IX/2025, titled

Sansaro Devi vs. Vikram Singh, decided on 29.11.2025 are

quashed and set aside, and the petitioner is acquitted of the

offence under challenge. It is made clear that the parties shall

remain bound by the terms and conditions of the compromise, and

any violation thereof shall be viewed seriously in accordance with

law.

4 ( 2026:HHC:3483 )

7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Cr. Appeal No. 1755 of

2010, titled Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S. Bor Car and another, in

para No. 38 held as under:

"38. Since a very large number of cheque bouncing cases

are still pending and interest rates have fallen in the last few

years, this Court is of the view that it is time to 'revisit and

tweak the guidelines'. Accordingly, the aforesaid guidelines

of compounding are modified as under:-

(a) If the accused pays the cheque amount

before recording of his evidence (namely

defence evidence), then the Trial Court may

allow compounding of the offence without

imposing any cost or penalty on the accused.

(b) If the accused makes the payment of the

cheque amount post the recording of his

evidence but prior to the pronouncement of

judgment by the Trial Court, the Magistrate

may allow compounding of the offence on

payment of additional 5% of the cheque

amount with the Legal Services Authority or

such other Authority as the Court deems fit.

(c) Similarly, if the payment of cheque

amount is made before the Sessions Court or

a High Court in Revision or Appeal, such

Court may compound the offence on the

condition that the accused pays 7.5% of the

cheque amount by way of costs.

5 ( 2026:HHC:3483 )

(d) Finally, if the cheque amount is tendered

before this Court, the figure would increase to

10% of the cheque amount."

8. Therefore, in view of the exposition of law as settled

by the Hon'ble Apex court, the present petition is disposed of as

having been compromised between the parties and the judgment

of conviction and order of sentence as passed by learned

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P.

on 04.07.2025, in case No. 93-III/2022, titled Vikram Singh vs.

Sansaro Devi, as affirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Dehra, District Kangra, H.P., in Cr. Appeal No. 16-G/IX/2025,

titled Sansaro Devi vs. Vikram Singh, decided on 29.11.2025 are

quashed and set-aside and present petitioner is acquitted of the

offences under challenge.

9. However, this order shall be, subject to the deposit of

7.5% of the cheque amount, as compounding fees, out of which

50% of the amount of compounding fee shall be deposited by the

present petitioner with the Member Secretary, H.P. State Legal

Services Authority, Shimla, and remaining 50% of the aforesaid

amount shall be deposited with the Chief Justice Disaster Relief

Fund, 2025 within a period of four weeks from today.

10. It is further clarified that if the petitioner fails to

deposit the compounding fee, as ordered by this Court, within a 6 ( 2026:HHC:3483 )

period of four weeks, then, the present order shall be deemed to

have been automatically revoked by reviving the judgment of

conviction and order of sentence dated 04.07.2025, passed by

learned trial Court and in that eventuality, she shall surrender

before the learned trial Court to undergo the substantive

sentence, imposed upon her, by the learned trial Court.

11. The petitioner is stated to be serving the substantive

sentence at Lala Lajpat Rai, District & Open Air Correctional

Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. She is ordered to be

released forthwith, if not required in any other case. Release

warrants be prepared accordingly and the same be sent to the

Superintendent, Lala Lajpat Rai, District & Open Air Correctional

Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P.

12. A downloaded copy of this order shall be accepted

by the concerned authority after verifying the same from official

website of this Court.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed

of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.




                                                                              (Romesh Verma)
                                                                               Vacation Judge
February 12, 2026
    (Nisha)



    KHEM             DN: C=IN, O=HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL
                     PRADESH SHIMLA, Phone=

b3bb0330a36091c417dc6aa42212c14caec7825b a4158459325bd600d273f58b, PostalCode=

RAJ 171001, S=Himachal Pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 6aa9db3b3e85e608387fb6f0fa0bb2ddacd2e1b82f 232ca3c0adea331da33983, CN=KHEM RAJ THAKUR Reason: I am the author of this document

THAKUR Location: