1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal impugns judgment and order of the High Court for the State of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh dated 28.8.2025 by which C.R.R. No. 2096/2025 filed by the appellant against the appellate order affirming the sentence pronounced by the Trial Court, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, has been dismissed.

3. During pendency of this appeal, the parties have entered into a settlement agreement the terms of which are extracted below:

                   "Today, on 29.10.2025, both first and second party with mutual consent and in the presence of witnesses, a decision was taken in mutual brotherhood and in Panchayati manner regarding the monetary transaction between the first and second parties through the mother regarding the Complaint U/s 138 of N.I Act bearing C.R.R. No. 2096 of 2025 which has been decided by the Honorable Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh on 28.01.2025. According to the decision, now there is no outstanding amount between complainant Ashok Kumar and Tinku. This money matter relates to a cheque issued by Tinku, in respect of which a decision was passed against the Tinku in the court of ACJM, Jind on 06.02.2019. The criminal appeal was heard in the court of Additional Session Judge, Jind on 04.07.2025, and a revision of that decision was diled in the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh, the decision of which was given in CRR No. 2096/2025 on 28.8.2025 the courts convicted the accused.

                   As per the mutual consent decision, complainant Ashok Kumar no longer wished to pursue any further proceedings against Tinku. If a statement from complainant Ashok Kumar is required, he will be prepared to record it. If the Honorable Supreme Court acquits Tinku in the case, I, the complainant, have no objection.

                   That this agreement has been entered into in person with the mutual consent of both parties, without any fear or pressure. This agreement will be binding on both parties and they will not raise any objection to this agreement in the future, and neither party will take undue advantage of any technical/linguistic deficiencies in this agreement.

                   This agreement has been made by both parties, after listening and understanding, freely, without any pressure, and with an eye on their respective futures, and has been entered into in writing for record. Both parties have affixed their signatures/thumbprints in the presence of witnesses."

3. The aforesaid Settlement was sent for verification to the High Court. The High Court has verified the same, and a letter has been received from the Registrar General of the High Court stating therein, that the Settlement is verified by the parties.

4. Having regard to the above and by taking into consideration the provisions of Section 147 of the N.I. Act and the law laid down by this Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H[(2010) 5 SCC 663] ; Raj Reddy Kallem v. State of Haryana[(2024) 8 SCC 588]; B. V. Seshaiah v. State of Telengana and another[(2023) 18 SCC 512] and Gian Chand Garg v. Harpal Singh and another[2025 SCC OnLine SC 2317] that an offence punishable under Section 138 N.I. Act is compoundable with the consent of parties at any stage, even after conviction, we deem it appropriate to set aside the conviction order and allow this appeal in terms of the Settlement.

6. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

5. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.