..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.493 OF 2007 Mr.Mahesh Premji Thakker. ..Petitioner. Versus Mr.Jaykant R. Shah and Anr. ..Respondents. .... Mr.G.K.Pendse, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.Paras N. Vira, Adv. for respondent No.1. Mr.K.V.Saste, APP, for the State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 14th August, 2008. DATED : 14th August, 2008. DATED : 14th August, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner-orig.accused, the learned Advocate for respondent No.1-orig.complainant and the learned APP for the State. The original complainant is present in person. 2. By judgment and order dated 4th August, 2006 the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 13th Court, Dadar, Mumbai convicted the petitioner in C.C. No.2902/SS/2005 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred Appeal before the Sessions Court ..(2).. and the said appeal came to be dismissed. Hence this Revision. 3. During pendency of this Revision, the parties have amicably settled the dispute. The learned Advocate for the orig.complainant has stated that the complainant be allowed to withdraw Rs.1,60,000/- which has been deposited by the petitioner before the trial Court and permission be granted to compound the matter. Mr.Pendse states on instructions that he will hand over original receipt relating to deposit of money before the trial Court to the complainant within a period of one week. 4. In view of the above facts, permission is granted to compound the matter. The petitioner is acquitted in the said case. Permission is granted to the respondent-orig.complainant to withdraw the amount of Rs.1,60,000/-. Liberty to the parties to approach this Court in case of difficulty. 5. Criminal Revision Application is disposed of accordingly. ..(3).. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)