..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.216 OF 2007 Vilas Janardan Khaire. ..Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..Respondents. .... Ms.Vijaya Mistry, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.R.S.Jangi, Adv. for respondent No.2. Mr.S.R.Shinde, APP, for State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 22nd October, 2008. DATED : 22nd October, 2008. DATED : 22nd October, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner-orig.accused, the learned Advocate for respondent No.2-orig.complainant and the learned APP for the State. 2. By judgment and order dated 25.4.2006 the petitioner came to be convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act by the learned J.M.F.C., 3rd Court, Bhiwandi in SCC No.3532 of 2004. The appeal preferred by the petitioner against the said judgment and order came to be dismissed. Hence this Revision. ..(2).. 3. During pendency of the revision, the parties have amicably settled the matter. Pursuant to the settlement, bankers cheque being No.001817 in the sum of Rs.10,000/- drawn on Union Bank of India, Nerul branch dated 22.10.2008 in the name of the complainant is handed over to the learned Advocate for orig.complainant. The learned Advocate for the complainant states that as during pendency of the revision the parties have amicably settled the matter the offence may be compounded. 4. In view of the above facts, the offence is compounded and the petitioner-accused is acquitted therein. 5. Criminal Revision Application is disposed of accordingly. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)