ORDER : Vijay Bishnoi, J. Pursuant to the direction given by this Court on 28.04.2015, the respondent No.1- complainant has appeared before the Dy. Registrar (Judicial) of this Court today for the purpose of verifying the fact of compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the respondent No. 1-complainant. 2. The compromise has been verified by the Dy. Registrar (Judicial). 3. As per office report, this criminal revision petition is time barred but considering the fact that the petitioner-accused is in custody and he has entered into the compromise with the respondent No. 1-complainant, I deem it S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 867/2014 Vishnu Kumar v. Jagdish Prasad Joshi & Anr. proper to allow the application dated 26.07.2014 for condonation of delay. 4. Accordingly, the application dated 26.07.2014 is allowed. The delay in filing the criminal revision petition is condoned. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced for one year simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,20,000/- along with interest at the rate 12% per annum. He submits that against the order of conviction and sentence, petitioner-accused preferred appeal before the Sessions Judge, Churu which was dismissed, however, interest part has been waived. Being aggrieved, the present criminal revision petition has been filed. 5. The offence under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act is compoundable and parties i.e. petitioner-accused and respondent No.1- complainant Jagdish Prasad entered into the compromise and they have submitted compromise before the Court which is attested by the Notary Public. The respondent No. 1-complainant has S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.867/2014 Vishnu Kumar v. Jagdish Prasad Joshi & Anr. engaged Mr. S.K. Poonia, advocate as his counsel. 6. He submits that in compliance of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. reported (2010) 5 SCC 663 , 15% of the cheque amount i.e. Rs. 18,000/- has already been deposited before the State Legal Services Authority, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur vide challan No.113 dated 18.02.2015. Therefore, in view of the compromise entered into between the parties, the petitioner may be acquitted from the charge of Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act. 7. 18,000/- has already been deposited before the State Legal Services Authority, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur vide challan No.113 dated 18.02.2015. Therefore, in view of the compromise entered into between the parties, the petitioner may be acquitted from the charge of Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1- complainant on instruction submitted that respondent No.1-complainant has received the entire amount and executed the compromise deed and he has no objection if the criminal revision petition is allowed and the petitioner-accused is acquitted in pursuance of the compromise. The parties have entered into a compromise and in pursuance of the judgment rendered in Damodar S. Prabhu's case (supra), 15% of the cheque amount has already been deposited in the S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.867/2014 Vishnu Kumar v. Jagdish Prasad Joshi & Anr. State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur. 8. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Churu dated 07.08.2010 in Criminal Regular Case No.(341/2005) 255/2007 (Jagdish Prasad Joshi v. Vishnu Kumar) which was affirmed vide judgment dated 24.01.2011 in Criminal Appeal No.73/2010 (Vishnu Kumar v. Jagdish Prasad Joshi & Anr.) by the Sessions Judge, Churu is quashed and set aside and petitioner-accused is acquitted for the offence under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act in pursuance of compromise. 9. The criminal revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. Petition Allowed.