1 CRAG-48.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE  CRIMINAL CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.48 OF 2011 Kesarinath Narayan Patil .... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .... Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.34 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.48 OF 2011 Kesarinath Narayan Patil .... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents Shri Prakash Naik for the Applicant in both Applications. Ms S.D. Shinde, APP, for the State in both Applications. Ms Sharmila Kaushik for Respondent No.3 in CRA-48/2011. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: FEBRUARY 11, 2011 P.C: Leave to amend to implead the injured person as party respondent No.3. Amendment to 2 CRAG-48.11 be carried out forthwith. Ms Sharmila Kaushik waives service on behalf of respondent No.3. 2. This revision is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vasai, District Thane dismissing the appeal preferred by the applicant/appellant against his conviction, recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vasai, District Thane for the offences under Section 325 r/w Section 34 of the IPC. At the request of the applicant, the original complainant was allowed to be joined as party respondent and he has accordingly been joined. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP. Though the charge mentions that the applicant had voluntarily caused hurt to the complainant, in fact the evidence of the complainant Vishwanath itself shows that the person injured was one Vasanti Mhatre. The said Vasanti Mhatre is present in the Court and she has tendered her affidavit stating that she wishes to have the matter compounded. She has been identified by Advocate Ms Sharmila Kaushik. Since the offence under Section 325 of the IPC is compoundable, the composition of the offence is recorded. The affidavit is taken on the record and the order convicting the 3 CRAG-48.11 applicant for the offence under Section 325 is set aside. In view of the composition, the applicant would be acquitted of the said offence. The revision application accordingly stands disposed of. 3. In view of the above, Criminal Application No.34 of 2011 does not survive and it accordingly stands disposed of. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)