1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.103 OF 2010 Anandrao @ Balasaheb Jagannath Kothawade Age : 70 years, Occ : Nil, R/o Vavre Nagar, Nasik, Tq. & Dist.Nasik. ..Applicant V/s 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Umakant Nimba Pagare Age : 37 years, Occ : Agriculturist, R/o Pimpalner, Taluka Sakri, District Dhule. ..Respondents ..... Mr.Mukul Kulkarni, Advocate for applicant Mr.K.S. Patil, APP for respondent no.1 Mr.N.B. Suryawanshi, Advocate for respondent no.2 ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE,J DATE OF JUDGMENT : 13th April, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of Mr.Mukul Kulkarni, learned counsel for applicant and Mr.K.S. Patil, learned A.P.P. for respondent no.1 as well as Mr.N.B. Suryawanshi, learned counsel for respondent no.2, the matter is taken up for final hearing. The affidavit in reply filed by Mr.N.B. Suryawanshi, learned counsel for 2 respondent no.2 is taken on record. 2. At the outset, applicant (original accused) has preferred the present revision application challenging the conviction and sentence awarded to him under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in R.C.C. No.371/2005, sentencing him to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of Rs.65,000/- to the complainant, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months, rendered by the trial Court by judgment and order dated 16.07.2008, and also challenging the judgment and order dated 3rd April, 2010 delivered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, dismissing his Criminal Appeal no. 92/2008. 3. By way of affidavit in reply filed by respondent no.2, respondent no.2 states that the aforesaid proceeding has been compromised between himself (orig.complainant) and present applicant (original accused) and accordingly, Notarized document has also been executed by him and on behalf of present applicant by his son, since applicant is in jail and 3 photo copy of the said Notarized document is also annexed with the affidavit in reply as Annexure `R-I'. Respondent No.2 further states that he has agreed to compound the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act under Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act and he has no objection for quashing and setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed upon the present applicant. Respondent no.2 further states that it is agreed that present applicant will pay an amount of Rs.65,000/- to respondent no.2 and accordingly, an amount of Rs. 32,500/- has already been paid to respondent no.2 on 07.04.2010. It is also informed to him on behalf of present applicant that balance amount of Rs.32,500/- has already been deposited in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sakri and applicant shall have no objection, if the said amount is withdrawn by respondent no.2. Accordingly, the said amount be paid to respondent no.2 as well as judgment and order passed by learned Sessions Court, Dhule in Criminal Appeal no.92/2008 dated 03.04.2010 may be quashed and set aside and applicant be acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the 4 Negotiable Instruments Act. 4. Considering fact that the present revision application is preferred by applicant (original accused) challenging the conviction and sentence inflicted upon him by trial Court and confirmed by the learned Lower Appellate Court and also considering the contents of affidavit in reply filed by respondent no. 2, it is apparent that applicant (original accused) and respondent no.2 (original complainant) have compromised the matter between themselves and out of the compensation amount of Rs.65,000/-, an amount of Rs.32,500/- has already been paid by applicant on 07.04.2010 and the balance amount of Rs.32,500/- has already been deposited by applicant in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sakri and applicant has no objection to withdraw the said amount by respondent no.2. Accordingly, parties agreed to compromise the matter and respondent no.2 has no objection to quash and set aside the conviction and sentence inflicted upon applicant by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sakri and confirmed by Lower Appellate Court and also have no objection to acquit 5 the present applicant from offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 5. In the circumstances, present Criminal Revision Application No.103 of 2010 is allowed and the offence in R.C.C. No.371/2005 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act stands compounded under Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act and conviction and sentence inflicted upon applicant in R.C.C. No.371/2005 by judgment and order dated 16.07.2008 awarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sakri, Dist.Dhule and confirmed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule in criminal appeal No.92/2008 on 03.04.2008 dismissing the said appeal stands quashed and set aside and applicant herein stands acquitted therefrom and applicant be released from jail forthwith, if not required in any other case. 6. An amount of Rs.32,500/- deposited before learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sakri, Dist.Dhule be paid to respondent no.2, since applicant has no objection therefor. 6 7. Criminal revision application No.103/2010 stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute accordingly. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE) JUDGE gas/cra103.10