1 2026:CGHC:25700 Digitally NAFR signed by PRAKASH PRAKASH KUMAR KUMAR Date: 2026.06.23 16:54:36 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 687 of 2026 Sohanlal Verma S/o Shri Vidhyaram Verma, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Near Vinayak Garden 65, Block Gate No. 2, Vinayak Colony, Sector- 4, Shivanand Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, ... Applicant versus Champeshwar Kumar Sahu S/o Bisauha Ram Sahu Aged About 46 Years R/o Village And Post Mandhar, P.S. Dharsiwa District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. A.D. Kuldeep, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal, Order on Board 23/06/2026 1. The present criminal revision has been filed by the applicant - accused against the judgment dated 22.04.2026 passed by 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, Chhattisgarh in Criminal Appeal No.408/2024 arising out of judgment of conviction and sentence dated 28.10.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, in Complaint Case No.2328/2019 convicting the present applicant for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short ‘the NI Act’) and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months and to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default of 2 payment of compensation, additional simple imprisonment for 3 months. 2. Heard I.A. No.05/2026, application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, filed by the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant-accused submits that during the pendency of this revision, both the parties have settled their dispute. He further submits that the applicant has paid the whole subject amount to the complainant. He further submits that the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is a compoundable offence and, therefore, it is prayed that the application (I.A. No.5/2026) may be allowed and the applicant – Sohanlal Verma be acquitted of the offence levelled against him. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant also submits that the parties have voluntarily entered into compromise and the dispute between them have been settled. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and gone through the document Settlement Deed dated 26.05.2026. 6. As per the Settlement Deed dated 26.05.2026, the dispute stands completely settled between the parties. It also appears from the Settlement Deed that the parties have entered into compromise voluntarily with free consent, without any pressure, coercion or inducement and have signed the Settlement Deed voluntarily in presence of the Mediator. 7. Considering the fact that offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is a compoundable offence, I am inclined to allow I.A.05/2026. 3 8. In view of the above, the applicant – Sohanlal Verma is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the NI Act on the basis of the compromise. 9. Accordingly, the present revision stands disposed of.

10. Since the applicant is reported to be on bail, therefore, his bail bond shall remain in force for a period of six months from today in view of provision contained under Section 481 of the BNSS, 2023. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Prakash

1 2026:CGHC:25700 Digitally NAFR signed by PRAKASH PRAKASH KUMAR KUMAR Date: 2026.06.23 16:54:36 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 687 of 2026 Sohanlal Verma S/o Shri Vidhyaram Verma, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Near Vinayak Garden 65, Block Gate No. 2, Vinayak Colony, Sector- 4, Shivanand Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, ... Applicant versus Champeshwar Kumar Sahu S/o Bisauha Ram Sahu Aged About 46 Years R/o Village And Post Mandhar, P.S. Dharsiwa District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. A.D. Kuldeep, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal, Order on Board 23/06/2026 1. The present criminal revision has been filed by the applicant - accused against the judgment dated 22.04.2026 passed by 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, Chhattisgarh in Criminal Appeal No.408/2024 arising out of judgment of conviction and sentence dated 28.10.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, in Complaint Case No.2328/2019 convicting the present applicant for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short ‘the NI Act’) and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months and to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default of 2 payment of compensation, additional simple imprisonment for 3 months. 2. Heard I.A. No.05/2026, application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, filed by the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant-accused submits that during the pendency of this revision, both the parties have settled their dispute. He further submits that the applicant has paid the whole subject amount to the complainant. He further submits that the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is a compoundable offence and, therefore, it is prayed that the application (I.A. No.5/2026) may be allowed and the applicant – Sohanlal Verma be acquitted of the offence levelled against him. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant also submits that the parties have voluntarily entered into compromise and the dispute between them have been settled. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and gone through the document Settlement Deed dated 26.05.2026. 6. As per the Settlement Deed dated 26.05.2026, the dispute stands completely settled between the parties. It also appears from the Settlement Deed that the parties have entered into compromise voluntarily with free consent, without any pressure, coercion or inducement and have signed the Settlement Deed voluntarily in presence of the Mediator. 7. Considering the fact that offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is a compoundable offence, I am inclined to allow I.A.05/2026. 3 8. In view of the above, the applicant – Sohanlal Verma is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the NI Act on the basis of the compromise. 9. Accordingly, the present revision stands disposed of.

10. Since the applicant is reported to be on bail, therefore, his bail bond shall remain in force for a period of six months from today in view of provision contained under Section 481 of the BNSS, 2023. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Prakash