1 ndm revn.439.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 439 OF 2009 Mangilal Joharsing Rajpurohit. ... APPLICANT Vs. Arjunlal Chaganlal Shah and anr. ... RESPONDENTS -------- Mr. K.S. Patil for Applicant. Mr. Ganesh Gole with Mr. A.D. Gangal for Respondent No.1. Mr. K.V. Saste, APP for State. -------- CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 12 th April, 2010. P.C. 1 The revision challenges the concurrent orders passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 5 th Court, Dadar, Mumbai thereby convicting the Applicant-accused for the offences punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code and the order passed by the learned Ad-hoc Additional Session Judge, Sewree, Mumbai thereby dismissing the appeal. 2 I see no error in the concurrent orders passed by the learned 2 trial Court so also the Appellate Court to warrant interference with the findings recorded by them. Both the Court upon proper appreciation of the evidence have rightly come to a conclusion that the Applicant is guilty of the offence punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 However, taking into consideration the fact that the alleged defamatory statement was published in the year 1995 and almost a period of fifteen years has lapsed therefrom, a suggestion was given to the Respondent-complainant as to whether he will be satisfied, if the Applicant tenders an apology and pays compensation towards the injury that has been caused to the complainant. The complainant has accepted the said suggestion. 4 The application is therefore partly allowed. While maintaining the order of conviction, it is the order which directs the Applicant to undergo sentence is quashed and set aside. 5 Both the complainant and the Applicant are present in the Court. The Applicant has tendered his unconditional apology to the complainant. The complainant has been gracious to accept the apology. 6 The entire amount of Rs.4,000/-, which is deposited by the Applicant in the trial Court is directed to be paid to the complainant – Respondent and that the said amount would be permitted to be 3 withdrawn by the learned trial Court on the application being made by the Respondent-complainant. In addition to that, the Applicant shall pay an additional compensation of Rs.46,000/- to the complainant by a cross demand draft. The said demand draft shall be handed over by the counsel for the Applicant to the counsel for the complainant in any case prior to 5’o clock of 13 th April, 2010. [ B.R. GAVAI, J ]