ORDER : Rajendra Mahajan, J. Applicant has preferred this criminal revision under Section 397 read with 401 of the Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 23.1.2008 passed by the Court of Fifth Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Rewa in Criminal Appeal No. 421/2006, Ramanand Mishra v. Pradyumn Singh, confirming the judgment dated 12.12.2006 passed by the Special Court of JMFC, Rewa in Criminal Case No. 5895/2006, Pradyumn Singh v. Ramanand, whereby the applicant stands convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short the Act) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 30,000/- and in default of which to further undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. Having analyzed the evidence on record, both the Courts below found proved that the applicant had purchased tractor parts worth Rs. 52,358/- from the respondent's tractor shop at Rewa. The applicant paid the aforesaid amount by 5 cheques, of these cheques two cheques each Rs. 10,000/- had been dishonoured by the drawee Bank due to insufficient funds in the Bank account of the applicant. 2. Vide order dated 4.2.2008, this Court had suspended the execution of jail sentence awarded to the applicant till the final disposal of the revision. Considering the nature of the lis between the parties, vide order dated 22.7.2014 this Court referred the matter for mediation for amicable settlement of the dispute. As per the report of the Mediator dated 16.12.2014, the respondent agreed to settle the dispute for all intents and purposes on getting payment of Rs. 15,000/- from the applicant. Further according to report, the applicant paid the aforesaid amount in cash to the respondent at the time of mediation process itself. The Mediator in his report recommends the closure of the revision. 3. On 5.1.2015, the learned Counsel for the parties stated at the bar that the case be settled as per the report of the Mediator. 4. In the case of Kaushalya Devi Massand Vs. Roopkishore Khore, AIR 2011 SC 2566 , it is held in para 11 of the judgment that a offence under Section 138 of the Act is almost in the nature of civil wrongs which has been given criminal overtones. As per the provision of Section 147 of the Act, the offence under Section 138 of the Act is compoundable. Roopkishore Khore, AIR 2011 SC 2566 , it is held in para 11 of the judgment that a offence under Section 138 of the Act is almost in the nature of civil wrongs which has been given criminal overtones. As per the provision of Section 147 of the Act, the offence under Section 138 of the Act is compoundable. Since the dispute between the parties had been settled though the process of mediation, this Court accepts the mediation report. On the basis of it, the impugned judgment dated 23.1.2008 is hereby set aside and the applicant is acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the Act. The applicant is discharged from the bail and bail bonds. 5. As the matter between the parties is settled through the process of mediation, this Court waives the applicant from payment of compounding cost as specified in the guidelines 1(c) laid down in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H., AIR 2010 SC 1907 , in view of the recent decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority Vs. Prateek Jain, (2014) 10 SCALE 407 . 6. As per the Mediator report and the record of the trial Court, it appears that the applicant had deposited the fine amount. Hence, the trial Court is hereby directed to refund the fine amount to the applicant without delay subject to verification. Accordingly, this criminal revision is finally disposed of.