Dilip Sarjerao Mhaske vs Pradnya Pravin Salkar And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 2411 Bom

Tandale                                                               15.cri.revn-503-2018.doc

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                  CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 503 OF 2018

Dilip Sarjerao Mhaske                                        ....Applicant
       Vs.
Pradnya Pravin Salkar & Anr.                                 ....Respondents.

Mr. Himanshu Shinde for Applicant.
Mr. R. V. Gupta for Respondent No.1.
Mr. S. S. Hulke, APP for the Respondent-State.

                                               CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J.

DATE : 5th FEBRUARY, 2021.

P.C.:-

1. The parties herein, the Revision Applicant/original accused and

respondent No.1/original complainant have decided to compound the

offence committed by the applicant.

By the impugned Order dated 17th December 2016 passed by

the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 33 rd Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai, the

Revision Applicant has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instrument Act, 1881 and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for

three months and to pay a compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- to the

respondent No.1/original complainant and for non payment of

compensation in default of sentence is prescribed upon the applicant.

The Criminal Appeal no. 22 of 2017 preferred by the applicant

has been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and

Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai by its judgment and Order dated 8 th

Tandale 15.cri.revn-503-2018.doc

August 2018.

2. Today, the parties herein through their Advocates have

tendered 'Consent Terms' dated 2 nd February 2021. Revision Applicant Mr.

Dilip Mhaske and respondent No.1/original complainant Pradnya Salkar are

personally present in the Court. They have admitted their respective

signatures on the 'Consent Terms'. Their signatures have been duly

identified by their respective Advocates. The said 'Consent Terms' dated 2 nd

February 2021 are taken on record and marked 'X' for identification.

3. The Revision Applicant today has handed over Demand Draft of

Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) to the respondent No.1 as contemplated

in clause No.5(e) of the 'Consent Terms'.

4. In view of the above, the parties are permitted to compound

the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act committed by the applicant and is

accordingly compounded by consent of respondent No.1/original

complainant.

The impugned Orders dated 17 th December 2016 passed by the

Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court, Ballard Pier, Mmbai, and 8th August

2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court,

Mumbai, Greater Mumbai in Appeal No. 22 of 2017 are hereby quashed

and set aside.

5. Revision Application is disposed off in the aforesaid terms.

(A.S. GADKARI, J.)