1 (CRA 359 of 2010) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 227 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.359 OF 2010 Sahadev Shankar Rokade ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents ----- Mr.Rahul Kadam for Applicant Mr. A.S. Shitole- APP for the State Mr. R.B. Deshmukh for Respondent No.2 ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 5TH OCTOBER, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant. 2. The Applicant is challenging the order passed by the Learned Magistrate, who was pleased to convict the Applicant for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Sessions Court, in the appeal filed by the Applicant, was pleased to dismiss the appeal since the direction given by the Court was not complied. Against the said order, he has preferred this revision application. 2 (CRA 359 of 2010) 3. It is submitted that the parties have now settled the dispute. Affidavit in reply is filed by the Respondent No.2- Original Complainant, which is taken on record. In the affidavit in reply, in which is stated that he has received an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- towards full and final settlement of the entire amount which was due and payable to him. The Complainant in his affidavit in reply has also stated that he has no objection if the offence is compoundable and the judgment and order passed by the learned Magistrate is set aside. 4. The offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable and in view of the affidavit in reply, therefore, in my view, the orders passed by both the Courts below has to be quashed and set aside. Both the parties are present in the Court. 5. Hence, Criminal Revision Application is allowed and is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Vakalatnama shall be filed by the learned counsel for the Respondent No.2. Application for bail does not survive and is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)