Bombay High Court
Nitin Suresh Pansare vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 15 June, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
2023:BHC-AS:15856
:1: 14-i.REVN-ST-10738-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION [STAMP] NO.10738 OF 2023
Nitin Suresh Pansare ..... Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra
and another .... Respondents
-----
Mr. Raj Kapadia, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. M.G. Patil, APP for the Respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Soham V. Powar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.
-----
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 15th JUNE, 2023
P.C. :
1. The Applicant has challenged the judgment and
order dated 24.2.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions
Judge, Pune in Criminal Appeal No.135/2014 upholding the
judgment and order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First
Class, Pune dated 11.2.2014 in S.C.C. No.51785/2009
convicting the Applicant for the offence punishable under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and
sentencing him to suffer SI for one month and to pay
compensation of Rs.15,000/- and in default to suffer further
SI for fifteen days.
1 of 3
Deshmane(PS)
::: Uploaded on - 15/06/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/06/2023 22:15:46 :::
:2: 14-i.REVN-ST-10738-23.odt
2. Heard Shri Raj Kapadia, learned counsel for the
Applicant, Shri M.G. Patil, learned APP for the Respondent
No.1-State and Shri Soham Powar, learned counsel for the
Respondent No.2. The Respondent No.2 is present in the
Court today and he is identified by his learned Advocate.
3. Today, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2,
who was the original complainant, has filed an affidavit
affirmed by the Respondent No.2. It is mentioned in the
affidavit that the matter is compromised between the
Applicant and the Respondent No.2. The complainant-
Respondent No.2 has received Rs.50,000/- from the
Applicant-accused vide Demand Draft bearing No.005733
drawn on HDFC Bank dated 3.6.2023. This amount is
accepted by the Respondent No.2 by way of full and final
settlement of the legal dues outstanding in favour of the
Respondent No.2. The affidavit is taken on record and
marked 'X' for identification.
4. Considering this affidavit, the impugned orders
can be set aside and the Applicant can be acquitted. The
2 of 3
::: Uploaded on - 15/06/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/06/2023 22:15:46 :::
:3: 14-i.REVN-ST-10738-23.odt
Applicant is at present in jail and, therefore, he deserves to
be released immediately.
5. Hence, the following order :
:: O R D E R ::
i. Criminal Revision Application is allowed.
ii. The judgment and order dated 11.2.2014 passed by
the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pune in S.C.C.
No.51785/2009 as well as the judgment and order
dated 24.2.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions
Judge, Pune in Criminal Appeal No.135/2014, are set
aside.
iii. The Applicant is acquitted. The Applicant is in
custody. He shall be released forthwith, if not
required in any other case.
iv. With these observations, Criminal Revision
Application is disposed of.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
Deshmane (PS)
3 of 3
