1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 96 OF 2010 Bhushan s/o Anandrao Pagar ...Applicant VERSUS Satish s/o Chandrasing Patil & anr. ...Respondents ..... Shri Mahesh S.Deshmukh, advocate for the applicant Shri P.S.Shendurnikar, advocate for respondent no.1 Shri P.P.More, APP for respondent no.2. ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 15th April, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Shri Mahesh S.Deshmukh, advocate for the applicant, Shri P.A.Shendurnikar, advocate for respondent no.1 and Shri P.P.More, APP for respondent no.2. 2 The applicant (original accused) has filed the present Revision Application challenging the conviction passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chalisgaon in S.C.C. No. 304 of 2005 on 25.8.2008 2 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, sentencing the applicant to suffer S.I. for three months and directing him to pay the compensation to the complainant for the loss sustained under Section 357 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the tune of Rs. 1,05,000/- and also challenging the judgment and order rendered by the Sessions Judge, Jalgaon on 4.2.2010 in Criminal Appeal No. 79 of 2008 dismissing the said appeal which was filed by the applicant challenging the afore said conviction and sentence. Accordingly after dismissal of the said appeal as afore said, the applicant (original accused) was taken into custody and he is in jail presently. 3 On the face of the said position, Shri Anandrao Pundlik Pagar i.e. father of the applicant (original applicant) and respondent no.1 namely Satish Chandrasing Patil (original complainant) entered into a compromise and the said deed of compromise dated 15.4.2010 is produced on record along with the compromise purshis and same is marked as document ‘X’ collectively. The deed of compromise reflects that the parties have arrived at the compromise and settled that the applicant has agreed to pay the compensation amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the respondent instead of Rs. 1,05,000/- and the respondent has agreed to the same. Accordingly, parties have arrived at the compromise that the matter would be settled fully and finally at Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation instead of Rs.1,05,000/-. Out of the said settled amount of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-, the applicant’s father has paid Rs.80,000/- to respondent no. 1 i.e. original complainant 3 and respondent no.1 has received the said amount and he has no grievance about the same. As regards the balance amount of Rs. 20,000/-, it is submitted that the amount of Rs.5,000/- has been already deposited by the applicant before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chalisgaon and Rs. 15,000/- have been deposited before the Court of Sessions, Jalgaon and the applicant has no objection to withdraw the said amount by respondent no.1 from the said amount. 4 In the circumstances, both the respective parties submit that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the conviction and sentence inflicted upon by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chalisgaon and confirmed by the lower Appellate Court be quashed and set aside, compounding the offence under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the applicant be acquitted therefrom. 5 Anandrao Pundlik Pagar, the father of the applicant-who is undergoing sentence in jail (original accused) and respondent no.1-Satish Chandrasing Patil (original complainant) are present in the court and they have admitted the contents of the compromise and have put their respective signatures thereon. 6 The offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act stands compounded under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the conviction and sentence inflicted upon the applicant by learned 4 Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chalisgaon and confirmed by lower Appellate Court i.e. Sessions Judge, Jalgaon stand quashed and set aside and the applicant stands acquitted for the offence/charge levelled against him and the applicant/accused be released from the jail forthwith, if not required in any other case. Respondent no.1 is permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.. 5,000/-, which is deposited by the applicant before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chalisgaon, as well as respondent no.1 is also permitted to withdraw amount of Rs. 15,000/- from the Court of Sessions, Jalgaon, which was deposited by the applicant, since the applicant has no objection therefor. 7 The present Criminal Revision Application No. 96 of 2010 stands disposed of accordingly in the above terms. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crira96.10