JUDGMENT Vivek Singh Thakur J. (Oral) - Present Revision Petition has been filed assailing judgment passed by learned Sessions Judge Kullu, H.P. in Cr. Appeal No. 2 of 2018, dated 8.6.2018, whereby judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Kullu, H.P., dated 6.1.2018 in Criminal Complaint No. 340-1 of 2011, convicting and sentencing the petitioner-accused to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/-, to the complainant, has been affirmed. 2. During pendency of present petition, a joint application under Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act , read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for placing the compromise deed on record with respect to settlement between the parties, qua the present dispute, praying for passing of appropriate order in view of said settlement. It is evident from the perusal of compromise that the petitioner/convict has paid the amount of compensation i.e. Rs. 8,00,000/- to the respondent/complainant and in turn complainant had agreed to withdraw the complaint for maintaining cordial and friendly relations between the parties and has conveyed no objection for compounding of the case. 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent, under instructions of original counsel, submits that amount stands received and now no claim is pending against the petitioner/convict and he has instructions to communicate no objection for allowing the application and compounding the case. 4. Consequently, respondent/complainant is permitted to withdraw the complaint and matter is compounded and complaint arising out of dishonor of cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is treated to be withdrawn and judgments of conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below are quashed and set aside. Petitioner-accused is acquitted of the accusation framed against him, subject to payment of compounding fee. 5. Referring the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) SCC 663 as clarified in Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority Vs. Prateek Jain and another 2014 (10) SCC 690 , learned counsel for the petitioner/convict submits that the cheque amount was Rs. 7,00,000/- and the convict/petitioner has paid Rs. 5. Referring the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. 2010 (5) SCC 663 as clarified in Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority Vs. Prateek Jain and another 2014 (10) SCC 690 , learned counsel for the petitioner/convict submits that the cheque amount was Rs. 7,00,000/- and the convict/petitioner has paid Rs. 1,00,000/- over and above the cheque amount to the respondent-complainant and his business was running in losses and therefore, he could not arrange the funds for honoring the cheque and also was not able to pay the amount during the pendency of the litigation before the trial Court as well as first Appellate Court and therefore, has prayed for exemption of payment of 15% of the compounding fee. Considering the prayer, lenient view is taken and petitioner/convict is directed to deposit Rs. 25,000/- as compounding fee with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla on or before 10 th May, 2019. 6. After depositing compounding fee/cost, petitioner shall place copy of receipt of deposit of compounding fee on record of this petition. In case of default in depositing compounding fee/cost with H.P. State Legal Service Authority, Shimla on or before 10 th May, 2019, the judgments of conviction and sentence shall automatically revive. 7. Petition stands disposed of, in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti.