Bombay High Court
Manik Jaysingrao Mulik vs Jayesh Chandrakant Mirani And Anr on 12 September, 2022
Bench: Prakash Deu Naik
17-REVN-200-2020.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 200 OF 2020
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1313 OF 2020
Manik Jaysingrao Mulik ...Applicant
Versus
Jayesh Chandrakant Mirani And Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 201 OF 2020
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1315 OF 2020
Manik Jaysingrao Mulik ...Applicant
Versus
Jayesh Chandrakant Mirani And Anr. ...Respondents
....
Mr. Jayant J. Bardeskar, Advocate for the Applicant in both
Applications.
Mr. Prashant D. Jadhav, Advocate for Respondent No.1 in both
Applications.
Mr. A. R. Patil, APP for the Respondent - State.
....
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 12th SEPTEMBER, 2022.
PER COURT:
1. The revision applicant has challenged the order dated
16.01.2020 passed by the Sessions Court in Criminal Appeal
No.254 of 2018 and the judgment order dated 26.03.2018 passed
by the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 27 th Court,
Digitally signed
by SAJAKALI
SAJAKALI LIYAKAT
LIYAKAT
JAMADAR
Date:
Sajakali Jamadar 1 of 4
JAMADAR 2022.09.13
19:09:00
+0530
17-REVN-200-2020.doc
Mulund, Mumbai in C.C. No.1786/SS/2015. The revision
applicant has also challenged the judgment and order dated
16.01.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in
Criminal Appeal No.253 of 2018 and judgment and order dated
26.03.2018 passed by the Court of learned Metropolitan
Magistrate, 27th Court, Mulund, Mumbai in C.C. No.1785/SS/2015.
In both the complaints, the revision applicant was convicted for
offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and
sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for one year and to pay
fine of Rs.20,00,000/-. The appellants challenging the judgment of
the trial Court in both the cases were dismissed and sentence of
fine was confirmed.
2. The Advocates representing both the sides have jointly
submitted that the parties have arrived at amicable settlement.
Consent terms are executed. It is agreed between both the sides
that the matters can be settled on payment of Rs.13,50,000/- in
each matter to the complainant. It is also agreed that the amount
of Rs.10,50,000/- deposited in each complaint which is subject
matter of the revision application before the trial Court can be
allowed to be withdrawn by the original complainant. The balance
amount of Rs.3,00,000/- has paid by way of Demand Draft. The
Sajakali Jamadar 2 of 4
17-REVN-200-2020.doc
photo copy of the said Demand Draft has been produced for
consideration to the complainant. The said Demand Draft of
Rs.3,00,000/- each are handed over to the complainant in the
Court. Out of Rs.10,50,000/- deposited in each case, the
complainant has withdrawn the amount of Rs.8,00,000/- in each
complaint.
3. Learned Advocate on instructions from the complainant, who
is present in the Court submitted that, in view of settlement arrived
at between the parties, the revision applications can be allowed and
the judgment of the conviction can be set aside by acquitting the
revision applicant (accused). The consent terms are taken on
record and marked as 'X' & 'X-1' for identification.
4. In view of submissions, I pass the following order :-
ORDER
i. Criminal Revision Application Nos.200 of 2020 and
201 of 2020 are allowed;
ii. The judgment and order dated 26.03.2018 passed in
C.C. No.1786/SS/2015 passed by learned Metropolitan
Magistrate, 27th Court, Mulund, Mumbai convicting the
revision applicant for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 and the judgment and order dated
Sajakali Jamadar 3 of 4
17-REVN-200-2020.doc
16.01.2020 passed by the Sessions Court, Mumbai in Criminal
Appeal No.254 of 2018 confirming the judgment of the trial
Court are set aside and the revision applicant is acquitted in
C.C. No.1786/SS/2015.
iii. The judgment and order dated 26.03.2018 passed by
the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 27 th Court,
Mulund, Mumbai in C.C. No.1785/SS/2015 convicting the
revision applicant for the offence punishable under Section
138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 as well as judgment
and order dated 16.01.2020 passed by Sessions Court in
Criminal Appeal No.253 of 2018 confirming the judgment of
the trial Court are set aside and the revision applicant is
acquitted in C.C. No.1785/SS/2015.
iv. The revision applicant shall cooperate with the original
complainant in withdrawal of the amount in each complaint.
v. Revision Applications as well as Interim Applications
are disposed off accordingly.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
Sajakali Jamadar 4 of 4
