{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1425 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.54 OF 2009 Sevantabai w/o Vithoba Avchare APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Another RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. S.P.Urgunde, Advocate for the applicant Mr. S,G.Nandedkar, APP for respondent State Mr.S.A.Wakure h/f Mr.V.V.Tamke, Advocate for R-2 ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 22nd June 2010 PER COURT: 1. Though this application was not on board, yet at the request of learned counsel for applicant taken on board. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this application, the applicant, who is original complainant, in STCC No.211/2005, has prayed to allow her to withdraw the amount of compensation in the sum of Rs.60,000/- deposited by original accused before the lower court on {2} 13.02.2009. 3. Admittedly, the amount of the cheque, which was bounced, is also Rs.60,000/-. In view of this fact and considering the age of the applicant, original complainant, i.e. 69 years, the application deserves to be allowed. 4. Consequently, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause “A” and “B” and stands disposed of. The applicant is allowed to withdraw the amount of Rs.60,000/- deposited by the original accused, on furnishing proper surety. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln1425-10 {3} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.54 OF 2009 Salamat Khan Fakir Khan Pathan APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Another RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. S.A.Wakure h/f Mr.V.V.Tamke, Advocate for applicant Mr. S,G.Nandedkar, APP for respondent State Mr.S.P.Urgunde, Advocate for the respondent No.2 ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 22nd June 2010 PER COURT: 1. It is stated across the bar that there is likelihood of compromise between the parties. In the premise, by consent, S.O. to 13.07.2010. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln1425-10