1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 82/2011 (APPR) IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 594/2011 IN CRIMINAL REVISION............/2011 (Shankarkumar Lilwani vs. Maheshkumar Agrawal and another ) .................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 20 th June, 2011. Cri.Appln.No.82/2011: Heard Mr I S Charlewar, learned counsel for the applicant ; Mr. Anant Dixit, for Respondent No.1 and Mr M K Pathan, learned APP for respondent no.2. By this application, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 123 days in filing Criminal Revision Application. The respondents have no objection to condone the delay. For the reasons stated in the applciation, delay is condoned. Application is allowed. Cri. Appln.No. 594/2011: Heard. This is an applciation u/s 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Both the parties along with their respective Advocates are present. Applicant-Shankarkumar 2 is identified by learned Advocate Mr. Charlewar ; whereas Mr Maheshkumar is identified by Mr Dixit, Advocate. Maheshkumar is the original complainant and he states that he has received the entire payment of money under the cheque in question and has no grievance whatsoever left against the accused Shankarkumar Lilwani. He states that both of them have amicably settled their dispute amongst themselves outside the Court. Both the Advocates pray that offence punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act be allowed to be compounded and the impugned judgment and order passed in Summary Criminal Complaint No. 3197 / 2002 which was confirmed by the learned Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia in Criminal Appeal No. 28/2006 vide judgment and order dated 30.9.2010 be quashed and set aside. After hearing the parties and their Advocates and considering the application, I think no fruitful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings since the parties have no grievance left against each other and the complainant has recovered the money due and payable to him. Hence application is allowed as prayed for. Criminal Revision No..../2011: In view of the above order, nothing survives to be decided in the Criminal Revision Application. The Revision is disposed of. JUDGE Sahare