[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVN.APPLN.NO.93 OF 2007 Arun Narsingh Mulye ..Applicant Vs. Jaisingh Lahu Ghosale and anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.Rakesh Bhatkar with Harshad Bhadbhade advocate for applicant Mr.Deepak S.Shinde for Respondent No.1 Mr. S.S.Pednekar A.P.P. for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : APRIL 11, 2007 DATE : APRIL 11, 2007 DATE : APRIL 11, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant-original accused, learned advocate for the respondent no.1-original complainant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The complainant is present in Court. 2. The applicant has been convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act by the learned JMFC Ratnagiri. The appeal preferred by the applicant came to be dismissed by the Sessions Judge at Ratnagiri. Being aggrieved thereby, this [-2-] revision application has been preferred. 3. During the pendency of the revision, the applicant and the complainant have settled the matter amicably and have arrived at the consent terms. The parties have tendered the consent terms. The said consent terms are taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification. Revision is disposed of in terms of consent terms. In view of the consent terms, the proceedings relating to Summary Cri.Case No.368 of 2004 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, are quashed and the accused is acquitted therein. 4. Revision is disposed of accordingly. [ Smt. V.K.Tahilramani, J.]