Become a member

Get the best offers and updates relating to Liberty Case News.

― Advertisement ―

Call for Applications – Supervisor (Litigation, Victim Advocacy Project)

The post Call for Applications – Supervisor (Litigation, Victim Advocacy Project) appeared first on National Law University Delhi. Source link
HomeHigh CourtHimachal Pradesh High CourtSita Ram vs Baldev Chand on 24 February, 2026

Sita Ram vs Baldev Chand on 24 February, 2026

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Sita Ram vs Baldev Chand on 24 February, 2026

.

Sita Ram versus Baldev Chand

Cr. M.P. No.181/2026 in
Cr. Revision No. 797/2024

of
Reserved on: 09.01.2026

24.02.2026 Present: Mr G.R. Palsra, Advocate, for the applicant.

rtMr H.S. Rangra, Advocate, for the
respondent.

The applicant/accused was convicted by

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1,

Mandi, District Mandi, H.P for the commission of an

offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881 (in short, ‘NI Act‘) and sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 04 months,

pay a compensation of ₹5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh

only) and in default of payment of compensation, to

undergo further simple imprisonment for one month vide

judgment and order dated 02.07.2024 passed in Criminal

Complaint No. 330-III-/18/15. The applicant/accused filed

an appeal, which was registered as Cr. Appeal No. 113 of

2024 titled Sita Ram versus Baldev Chand, and was

dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District

Mandi, H.P., on 08.11.2024. He preferred a revision before

this Court, which was registered as Cr. Revision No.

797/2024, and was dismissed on 12.11.2025.

::: Downloaded on – 24/02/2026 20:37:23 :::CIS

.

The applicant/accused has now filed an

application under Section 147 of the NI Act for granting

of
permission to compound the offence based on a

compromise effected between the parties.

rtThe Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court held

in Chune Ram vs. Brikam Chand, 2025:HHC:38122 , that

the Court can quash the conviction even after its

finalisation in criminal revision based on the compromise

effected between the parties. This judgment is binding

upon this Court.

It was submitted that the cheque amount of

7.5% has to be deposited as per the judgment of Hon’ble

Supreme Court in Sanjabij Tari v. Kishore S. Borcar,

(2025) 259 Comp Cas 685: 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2069 . This

submission is not acceptable because the judgment does

not deal with a situation where the matter has been

decided by the High Court, and the matter has been

compromised after the decision of the Court. Hon’ble

Supreme Court held that 7.5% of the cheque amount has

to be deposited when the matter is pending before the

High Court. Therefore, the submission that 7.5% of the

cheque amount has to be deposited cannot be accepted.

::: Downloaded on – 24/02/2026 20:37:23 :::CIS

.

The applicant/accused had unsuccessfully

contested the matter before the learned Trial Court,

learned Appellate Court and this Court. He has

of
compromised the matter after the decision of this Court.

This Court invested the time in going through the case
rt
file, hearing the arguments and adjudicating the pleas

taken by the parties. This time could have been utilised in

the disposal of other matters which are pending before

this Court. A tendency has grown amongst the litigants to

challenge the judgments of the learned Courts below

before this Court, inviting the findings on merits, and

compromise the matter after the findings go against

them. This tendency is taking up the valuable judicial

time of the Court leading to the increase in the pendency

of the cases. This tendency has to be discouraged with

heavy hands to utilise the precious time of the Court to

adjudicate other pending matters. Hence, it is considered

appropriate that 15% of the cheque amount as proposed in

Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. [(2010) 159 Comp

Cas 1 (SC); (2010) 5 SCC 663; (2010) 2 SCC (Civ) 520;

(2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 1328; 2010 SCC OnLine SC 546 be

imposed as costs to dissuade the litigants from taking a

chance by arguing the matter on merits and thereafter

::: Downloaded on – 24/02/2026 20:37:23 :::CIS
.

compromising the matter by paying the nominal amount.

Therefore, it is ordered that 15 % of the cheque amount

of
would be deposited before the H.P. State Legal Services

Authority, after which the plea for composition would be
rt
considered by the Court. Let the amount be deposited, and

the matter be listed thereafter.

(Rakesh Kainthla)
24 February, 2026 Judge
(yogesh)

::: Downloaded on – 24/02/2026 20:37:23 :::CIS



Source link