[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL W.P. NO.2275 OF 2007 Mukku Tirupati Reddy ..Petitioner Vs. Mukesh Umedlal Gandhi and Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.A.Z.Mookhtiar advocate for petitioner Mr.V.M.Waghela Adv. for Respondent no.1 Mr.U.M.Nakhawa 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 : OCTOBER 6, 2008 DATE : OCTOBER 6, 2008 DATE : OCTOBER 6, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner, the learned advocate for the respondent no.1-original complainant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. By judgment and order dated 8.3.2007, the learned 8th Jt.Judicial Magistrate F.C. Thane convicted the petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable instruments Act in S.C.C.No.3896 of 2002. The appeal preferred by the petitioner came to be dismissed, hence, this petition. [-2-] 3. During the pendency of this petition, parties have amicably settled the matter and they have tendered consent terms which are taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification. Writ petition is disposed of in terms of consent terms. Undertaking furnished by the petitioner is accepted. 4. In view of the consent terms, the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is compounded and the petitioner is acquitted thereunder. Bail bonds of the petitioner shall stand cancelled. 5. Petition is disposed of accordingly. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]