IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE_
DATED THIS THE 7" DAY or SEPTEMBER, 2009.gwiz
BEFORE:
THE aoN'sLs MR. JUSTICE A.S. pAcaasrsRs'*'
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION Noigg or 2603,
BETWEEN:
Farooq Pasha, .z
S/o. Mohammad Noorulla,a'
Carrying on business as
Proprietor of
M/S. Topkit Garments,
Opp. to Post Office,"
Brigade Road, H:_ E", . « ~_ _».s. V
Bangalore. 5' j.""*gg'af,"»_l *,Vl PETITIONER/S
[By Sri.C,é,"Gopal§§gafiy;'Adv,l"
AND:
Reena Abraham, _
W/Q. Col} ;;K, Bbh§},.. .....
:Aged'about"; uyears,
ResidingVat'THeritage',
No{23,n7t*_Cross,g,~
L.P.'Shastry--Nagar,
*«sAL posr, Bangalore. M RESPONDENT/S
i,},[BygM/s.”Gururaj Kulkarni &
‘A’fl.*Hanumanthachar, Advs.}
*7?-k
This Crl.R.P. is filed u/Section 397(1) Cr.P.C.
iwpraying to aside the judgment and sentence dt.
S “l9.10.2DG7 passed by the XIII Addl. Sessions Judge,
Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore in Crl. Appeal No.
15178/2005 and the judgment and sentence dt.
fithe petitioner/abeused has agreed to pay a sum of
AHs,55rQO3fOOo,ahd the respondent/complainant agreed
vvpaid ‘today.*hy way of D.D. and an amount of
u’hlRsQ27,5OO40b is in deposit before the trial Court.
.x’*._ ‘withdraw the amount of Rs.27,5OD-O0 which is in
i9 deposit before the trial Court. In View of the
2 Crl.RP 25/G8
29.11.2005 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate
Traffic Court–I, Mayo Hall, Bangalore in C.Cg’*No.
9731/2002. v»’W K
This Crl.R.P. coming on for Admission this dayrf
the court made the following: s”~-“~ ” =
oesaaii
An application ,Vhd@:V”$éEti0n ‘l47H~of the
Negotiable Instruments Aet {hereinafter referred to
as “the Act” for”shortf is filed hy the parties to
the revision petitionwand their respective counsel,
requesting mrora7fie;¢i;;:§h’~£§i oempound the offence
punishable under Seotion 238 of the Act.
2. The parties have settled their dispute and
to reeeive the game. An amount of Rs.27,500–0O is
l3. The respondent/complainant is permitted to
agreement between the parties and the settlement of
BC
3 Crl.RP 25/08
their clainx to maintain good relationship between
them, the Misc. Crl.3746/2009 filed to compound the
offence is allowed. The conviction.f of jvtheifl
petitioner/accused for the offence under Seetioh=138 ”
of the Act is set aside and he is aeqnitted of then
said charge. The amount of fine ifie., RS«5,00dwdO_i;
deposited before the trial éohrt shell he tefunded
to the petitioner/aeohsedh leis j*the Vemonnt of
Rs.27,500–GO which is be paid to
the respondentflggmplaihent; – The tefiision petition
is accordingly ei§§sg§djg§;_so»;
Sd/~
IUDGE
xsm*e’-‘