1 pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 573 OF 2009 Amit M. Desai .. Applicant Versus Sateri Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha & Another ...Respondents Mr. A.S.Khandeparkar for Applicant. Mr. Sandeep Karnik for Respondent No.1 Mr.Kondedeshmukh APP for Respondent No.2 State. CORAM:- R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED:- 14th JULY, 2011. P.C. 1. The petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by learned Judicial Magistrate, I Class, Kudal, in Summary Case No.1 of 2005 by Order dated 16th January, 2007. 2. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No.6 of 2007 in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Sindhudurg, at Oros. The said appeal was decided by Judgment and Order dated 26th August, 2009 and the Order of the learned Judicial 2 Magistrate, First Class dated 16th January, 2007 regarding conviction and sentence was confirmed. 3. The petitioner has filed this Criminal Revision Application against the two orders as mentioned aforesaid. 4. It is noted that the parties wanted to settle the matter and that is how today application for compounding has been filed, duly signed by the petitioner, respondent no.1 and their respective advocates. Perusal of the said application shows that as of today sum of Rs.1,40,000/- has been deposited by the petitioner in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class. Learned Advocate for the petitioner also staes that the fine of Rs.4000/- has been separately deposited in the court. 5. My attention was drawn by learned Advocate Mr.Khandeparkar as well as learned Advocate Mr.Karnik that the petitioner and respondent no.1 have arrived at understanding that the respondent no. 1 should get Rs.1,40,000/- which are lying in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kudal in Summary Case No.1 of 2005. 3 6. In view of the above, the petitioner is acquitted of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in Case No. 1/2005 which is decided by the learned Judicial Magistrate, I Clas, Kudal, District Sndhudurg. The Order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, I Class, Kudal, Sindhudurg dated 16th January, 2007 in Summary Case NO.1 of 2005 is set aside. Similarly, order passed by Learned Sessions Judge, Sindhudurg, Oras in Appeal No.6 of 2007 on 26th August, 2009 is set aside. The sentence of imprisonment and fine imposed as per aforesaid orders is set aside. 7. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kudal, District Sindhudurg shall repay to the respondent no.1 sum of Rs.1,40,000/- which has been deposited by the petitioner from time to time without security or guarantee. 8. If any of the portion of the said amount of Rs.1,40,000/- has been invested by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kudal, Sindhudurg, in fixed deposit, he shall redeem the fixed deposit and pay to the respondent no.1 the amount with whatever interest which 4 may have accrued on the said amount invested by him. 9. Bail bond of the petitioner stands cancelled in view of the above order. If the petitioner has paid the fine amount, it be paid to the respondent. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)