1 Criminal Rev.Application No.124 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.124 OF 2011 1. Laxmikant S/o.Nemichand Jain, Age-45 years, Occu-Business, R/o.Shriram Mandir Chowk, Velodge, Tq.Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon APPLICANT VERSUS 1. State of Maharashtra 2. Shriram Kanhyalal Agrawal, Age-68 years, Occu-Business, R/o.Gandhi Chowk, Raver, Tq.Raver, Dist. Jalgaon RESPONDENTS Mr.K.C.Sant, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.S.D.Kaldate, learned A.P.P. for respondent State. Mr.M.K.Goyanka, learned counsel for respondent no.2. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 20/10/2011 PER COURT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. Challenge in this criminal revision application is to the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Criminal Appeal No.147/2005, dated 02/05/2011, by which the learned Sessions Judge had confirmed the order passed by the learned J.M.F.C. Raver in 2 Criminal Rev.Application No.124 of 2011 SCC No.1127/2002, by which the revision applicant was convicted for an offence punishable u/s. 138 of The N.I.Act and was sentenced to suffer SI for six months and to pay the compensation in the sum of Rs. 2,83,220/-. 3. Today, when this criminal revision application came up for final hearing, both the parties have moved joint application before this Court bearing Cri.Appl.No.4659/2011, seeking leave of this Court to allow them to compound the offence, and also pray that the respondent no. 2/the original complainant be allowed to withdraw the amount deposited by the revision applicant in the sum of Rs.2,53,220/- before the Appellate Court and Rs.30,000/- before the learned J.M.F.C. Raver. 4. By passing separate order, that application was allowed by this Court. In the light of this, as the leave was granted to compound the offence punishable u/s. 147 of The N.I.Act, this criminal revision application needs to be allowed. Accordingly, criminal revision application is hereby allowed. The conviction and sentence impugned, passed by both the Courts below, is quashed and set aside. 5. Rule thus made absolute. The bail bonds executed by him before the First Appellate Court, stands cancelled. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/OCT.2011/cri.rev.124-11