IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr.Revision No.12 of 2006. Date of Decision: 5th June, 2006. Ashwani Kumar. Petitioner. Versus Neem Bahadur. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Gupta, C.J. Whether approved for reporting1? For the Petitioner: Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Satyan Vaidya, Advocate. V.K.Gupta, C.J. (Oral) Cr.MP No.197 of 2006. Through the medium of this application filed by the petitioner and the respondent, signed by the petitioner as well as the respondent and their respective Advocates and supported by the personal affidavits of the petitioner and the respondent, the parties have informed the Court that they have compromised the matter with the result that the offence has been compounded. Consequently, the offence is compounded. Resultantly, the conviction of the petitioner under 2 Whether the reporters of Local Papers are allowed to see the Judgment? Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is hereby set aside. This petition is allowed. Whatever amount the petitioner has deposited in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla as a consequence of the aforesaid compromise between the parties, this amount be disbursed to the respondent on his making an application to that effect. The application is disposed of. Cr. Revision No.12/2006 & Cr.MP No.47/2006. In view of the order passed in Cr.MP No.197/2006, both the revision petition and the application are disposed of. Interim order passed on 1st February, 2006 shall stand vacated. 5th June, 2006. (V.K. Gupta), C.J. (tr)