JUDGMENT 1. - To question validity, correctness and propriety of the judgment dated 04.07.2011 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi in Criminal Appeal No.47/2011 affirming the judgment and order dated 12.03.2007 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi in Regular Criminal Case No.62/2005, this revision petition as per the provisions of Section 397 read with Section 401 CrPC is preferred. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi by the judgment dated 12.03.2007 convicted the petitioner for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and (2) sentenced him to undergo one year's simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 70,000/-. 2. The factual matrix necessary to be noticed is that the respondent No.1 co-operative society submitted a complaint before the competent court with assertion that the petitioner availed a loan from the respondent co-operative society for repair of his house. A cheque bearing No.218242 of Madhav Nagrik Sahakari Bank Limited, Pindwara Branch was tendered on 04.11.2004 to satisfy the loan amount. The cheque was dishonoured due to non-availability of funds, therefore, a notice was given to the revision petitioner on 25.11.2004. Despite notice, the cheque amount was not tendered. 3. After adjudicating the complaint, learned trial court convicted and sentenced the petitioner under the order dated 12.03.2007. The appellate court affirmed the same by the judgment impugned. 4. In revision petition, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that in pursuant to the order dated 09.08.2011 passed by this court, the petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs. 40,000/- with the respondent co- operative society. The petitioner is ready and willing to satisfy the due amount also, if some time is granted to him to do so. 5. This court by the order dated 05.10.2012 directed learned counsel for the respondent co-operative society to avail necessary instructions in this regard. 6. Mr. Girish Sankhala, learned counsel for the respondent, after availing necessary instructions stated that though the total amount due against the petitioner is Rs. 3,71,871/-, but if the petitioner deposits the entire amount in one instalment, then he is required to deposit only a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as per the One Time Settlement Scheme applicable with the respondent co-operative society. 7. 3,71,871/-, but if the petitioner deposits the entire amount in one instalment, then he is required to deposit only a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as per the One Time Settlement Scheme applicable with the respondent co-operative society. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he petitioner is ready to avail One Time Settlement Scheme, but looking to the fact that he is plying an auto rikshaw, he is not in a position to deposit the entire amount immediately in one instalment. 8. Having considered all the facts of the case and while appreciating the gesture shown by the respondent co-operative society, looking to the poor economic condition of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this revision petition by affirming the conviction, but modifying the sentence for the period already undergone, i.e. of two months and twenty eight days, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with the respondent co-operative society on or before 30.11.2012 and further the remaining amount of Rs. 50,000/- on or before 31.01.2013. In the event of failure to deposit the amount as per the schedule above, the petitioner shall be liable to undergo the sentence awarded by the trial court. The bail bonds and sureties furnished by the petitioner shall stand discharged, if he deposits the due amount as per the time schedule prescribed.Petition disposed of. *******