MW WWW; W mmQwmC» 3% 200? 31mm (Wu) mmm WWW WW $ Wm SB : HON’ELE E‘i&. JU§ TESE PETINKER DEWAKER { ‘ J §.11.2009 Shxi Anagd Shukla, Ashudeep Shafma. Shri Vijay Deshmu respandsnt No. 1-Dha1mulal J Shri Ajit Singh, RL. for‘ Heard on LA. No‘ 02, documents on record. The apphcatlon 1s ailo racord Aiso heard. 0'11 LA. No, jointly by :thc 'appocant as w Secficn 147 of me Ncgotia‘blc 320 (6) of that Codc of Grimm“ afiidavit for penniosion to apph‘cation it has been stateg. them has been settled. émd the to him by. the applicant ami anyone. Thus, as the offence Instrument Act for which'tbe compounda‘ole in Ilature With‘ further that the parties Avvocatxa aiong *“1t‘1 $6 ammcan — ' , Advocate along Wiih tha gde. he State; respond€nt No.2. vhich is a31 application for taking d. aud The document is mksn on O3, which is an application filad Ii as the re$pondcnt No.1 undsr instrument Act r€&d with Saction : . Proccdure diliy supported by his ‘compound the ogence. 1‘11 fiu‘s ihat the entire dispute between amount in dispute has been pair} now oothing remains due 'on Lm‘der Section 138 of the Negotiame app}icant has been cOnVicted, is; the permission of the Court and have compromised toe matter mm 111200 mm (W) WWW§wmK ~ % Wm Voluntariiy, for the reasons fated in the aforesaid apylication, . it is aiioweti. Compounding of tha offence as prayod for by the parties is permittoci. The result of this compromise would be the acquittal of tile applicant Ashudeep Shé‘u‘ma of tbs offence under Sectiox: 138 ofthe Negoa'able Instrur lent Act. ‘ Pntmker Diwaker' ~ Judge ' l mmm , Si!!- WCCQ “V