ORDER : Heard Mr. Jyoti Prasad Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Arpit Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party No. 2. 2. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 18.08.2011, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad, whereby and whereunder, petitioner has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 407 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. Challenge has also been made to the order dated 09.07.2015, passed by the Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No. 202 of 2011, by which judgment of the learned trial court has been affirmed and the appeal was dismissed. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that allegation has been made with respect to the defalcation of sale proceeds of the shop amounting to Rs. 3,54,736/- and petitioners being the Manager and Assistant Manager of the shop were held responsible for such defalcation. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that subsequently, matter has been compromised and the entire amount of Rs. 3,54,736/- has been paid to the opposite party No. 2 by way of two demand drafts of Rs. 1,77,368/-. Learned counsel submits that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Judicial Magistrate as well as affirmed by the learned appellate court be quashed and set aside. 4. Mr. Arpit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 2 has accepted the factum of compromise and stated that the entire amount of Rs.3,54,736/- has been received by him. 5. It appears that the allegation pursuant to which Dhanbad (Bankmore) P.S. Case No. 675 of 2000 was instituted was with respect to the defalcation of sale proceeds of the company amounting to Rs. 3,54,736/-. The petitioners were tried and after their conviction by the trial court, it was also affirmed by the appellate court. Both the petitioners and the opposite party No. 2 have compromised the matter and for that joint compromise petition has been filed vide I.A. (Criminal) No. 6206 of 2015 wherein it has been categorically stated that entire amount has been received by the opposite party No. 2 and since the grievance has been redressed, petitioners be acquitted from the charges levelled against them in view of the compromise so arrived at. 6. 6. Since the terms and conditions with respect of the amount in question has already been satisfied by the petitioners to the opposite party No. 2, this application is allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.08.2011 passed by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad (Bankmore) P.S. Case No. 675 of 2000, corresponding to G.R. No. 3349 of 2000 (T.R. No. 59/11) is hereby quashed and set aside on the basis of compromise. 7. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.