Judgment Sanjay Karol, J. Assailing the judgment dated 1.9.2010, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kinnaur District at Reckong Peo, Himachal Pradesh, in Case No.370-3 of 2007, titled as Ram Bhagat v. Yash Pal, as affirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr, Camp at Reckong Peo, vide judgment dated 19.10.2013, passed in Criminal Appeal No.30-K/10 of 2010, titled as Yash Pal v. Ram Bhagat, the accused-petitioner has filed the present Revision Petition under the provisions of Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 2. It is seen that the Trial Court has convicted the accused-petitioner and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- to the complainant for the loss and damage caused to him, in relation to offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The judgment of conviction and sentence stands upheld by the learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur. 3. Parties have amicably resolved their dispute, in view of the ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu versus Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663 . Statements of petitioner Yash Pal and respondent Ram Bhagat, who are present in Court, recorded separately and placed on the file. 4. Petitioner states that out of total amount of Rs.1,01,000/-, he has paid a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the respondent-complainant and deposited a sum of Rs.30,000/- in the trial Court. He undertakes to pay the balance amount of Rs.51,000/- to the complainant, within a period of two months from today. He also undertakes to deposit 15% of Rs.71,000/- (the cheque amount) in the Registry of this Court within the aforesaid period, which shall be remitted to the H.P. Legal Services Authority. Respondent Durga Dass Negi has accepted the statement of the petitioner. 5. Petitioner’s undertaking is accepted and accordingly the offence is compounded and the judgments of conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below are set aside. 6. It is clarified that in the event of non fulfillment of the solemn undertaking furnished by the petitioner to this Court, not only the judgments of conviction and sentence would automatically revive but also proceedings for violation of the undertaking, under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act as also the Constitution of India, shall be initiated against him. It is clarified that in the event of non fulfillment of the solemn undertaking furnished by the petitioner to this Court, not only the judgments of conviction and sentence would automatically revive but also proceedings for violation of the undertaking, under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act as also the Constitution of India, shall be initiated against him. With the aforesaid observations, present Revision Petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application, if any.