M/S Harjit Singh And Co. Commission Agent And ANR v. Balbir Singh And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.111+251 CRR-2031-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.08.2025 M/S HARJIT SINGH AND CO. COMMISSION AGENT AND ANR ....Revisionists

Versus

BALBIR SINGH AND ANR .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present:- Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the revisionists. Mr. Hardik Ahluwalia, Advocate for the complainant(s). Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab.

***** SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral) CRM-20880-2025 This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS for exemption from filing certified copies of the settlement dated 12.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) and photocopy of power of attorney dated 01.04.2025 (Annexure P-2) for placing on record the same.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, and the learned counsel is granted exemption from filing certified/true typed copies of documents.

CRM-20881-2025 The instant application has been filed under Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act for compounding the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Main Case Learned counsel for the revisionists submitted that the matter has been compromised with respondent/complainant and the revisionist has paid the MAHIMA 2025.08.28 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

compromised amount to the respondent/complainant. Learned counsel for the complainant admitted the factum of compromise regarding receiving of compromised amount from the revisionist. On the point of compounding fee learned counsel relied upon the case "Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal, 2010(5) SCC 663" wherein it is held that competent Court can reduce the cost with regard to specific facts and circumstances of the case and stated that it is the discretion of the Court and same be exercised in the present case as the revisionist is behind bars for the last 2 years and financially broken so a lenient view be taken in the matter of compounding fee.

Heard.

As the matter has already been compromised between the parties and revisionist has already paid the compromised amount which learned counsel for the respondent No.2 admits. In view of these circumstances, since the revisionist is behind bars for the last two years, and in view of law as the ratio of laid down in Damodar's case (supra), the applicant-revisionist is directed to deposit Rs.30,000/- as compounding fee in the District Legal Service Authority concerned. As the matter has been compromised, so, revision is accepted. The impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence are set-aside. The concerned trial Court is directed to issue release warrant of the revisionist, at the earliest on production of receipt of costs of Rs.30,000/- which is to be deposited is District Legal Service Authority concerned.

(SUBHAS MEHLA) 19.08.2025 JUDGE mahima Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No MAHIMA 2025.08.28 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh