ORDER : 1. The present Criminal Revision Application is filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for seeking the following reliefs :- “14.(A) Your Lordships be pleased to admit this application. (B) Your Lordship may be pleased to call for the record and proceedings from the 10th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Surat in Criminal Appeal No. 307 of 2018. (C ) Your Lordships may be pleased to pending quash and set aside the judgment and order of conviction recorded by the learned 10th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Surat, dated July 25, 2019, whereby the appeal no. 307 of 2018 preferred by the petitioner is dismissed and the judgment and order of conviction recorded by the learned 9th Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, in Criminal Case No. 26649 of 2015, dated December 11, 2018 is confirmed, upholding the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. (D) Your Lordship pending admission and final disposal of the present petition may be pleased to stay the implementation, operation and execution of the judgment and order of conviction and suspend the sentence recorded by the learned 10th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court no. 10, Surat, dated July 25, 2019, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner is dismissed and the judgment and order of conviction recorded by the learned 9th Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, in Criminal Case No. 26649 of 2015 dated December 11, 2018 is confirmed, upholding the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and further be pleased to release the petitioner on bail during pendency of this Criminal Revision Application on any appropriate terms and conditions; (E) Your Lordship may be pleased to dispense with the affidavit as the petitioner is in judicial custody; (F) Your Lordship may be pleased to pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper.” 2. The case of the petitioner – original accused is that original complainant i.e. respondent no. 1 herein is a registered co-operative Bank under the provisions of Reserve Bank of India and is dealing in imparting financial assistance. The petitioner – accused had availed hypothecation overdraft loan from respondent no. 1 bearing Account No. 322, but could not repay the same. The case of the petitioner – original accused is that original complainant i.e. respondent no. 1 herein is a registered co-operative Bank under the provisions of Reserve Bank of India and is dealing in imparting financial assistance. The petitioner – accused had availed hypothecation overdraft loan from respondent no. 1 bearing Account No. 322, but could not repay the same. As a result of this, proceedings were initiated by respondent no. 1 - Bank for attaching the property and the petitioner was supposed to clear an amount by making repayment before 29.12.2014 and in respect of that a cheque bearing no. 052929 dated 29.12.2014 of HDFC Katar Gam, Surat Branch was signed by the petitioner – accused of Rs.36,36,765/- and handed over to respondent no. 1 – Bank by assuring respondent no. 1 - Bank that the same would be realized. 2.1. The assertion in the complaint is that the said cheque did not realized and returned back as a result of which, the proceedings were initiated under Section 13A of the Negotiable Instrument Act by respondent no. 1 - Bank against the present petitioner and the said criminal case came up for consideration before the learned 9th Additional Senior Civil Judge, and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat being Criminal Case No. 26649 of 2015 in which in exercise of power under Section 255(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure an order of conviction came to be passed by imposing punishment of imprisonment to the extent of one year and fine of Rs.37 lakhs and in default of payment of fine, three months additional simple imprisonment was ordered to be undertaken. It has also been submitted that out of the said amount of fine of Rs.37 lakhs, an amount of Rs.36,90,000/- is to be paid by way of compensation to respondent no. 1. 2.2. It has also been submitted that out of the said amount of fine of Rs.37 lakhs, an amount of Rs.36,90,000/- is to be paid by way of compensation to respondent no. 1. 2.2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order of conviction, the petitioner – accused has filed an appeal before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Surat, being Criminal Appeal No. 307 of 2018 which came up for consideration before the learned 10th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Surat who by way of judgment and order was pleased to dismiss the appeal filed by the petitioner – accused and the order of conviction recorded by the court below came to be confirmed and it is against this order passed by both the courts below, the present Criminal Revision Application is preferred by the petitioner – original accused. 3. This Court on 07.08.2019, while considering initially the criminal revision application along with application for regular bail was pleased to pass the following order :- “Order in R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 912 of 2019 : Heard Mr.R.Z. Shaikh, learned advocate for the applicant. According to him, the applicant is ready to deposit the entire cheque amount within a period of one month. He has submitted that pending the appeal, as per the direction of the appellate Court, he has already deposited an amount of Rs.7,20,000/-, the copy of receipt bearing No.4676030, is produced on record by him which is taken on record. The cheque amount was Rs.36 Lacs and out of which, Rs.7,20,000/- is already deposited. According to him, he is ready to settle the matter with the Bank. Hence, Notice returnable on 30th September, 2019. Ms.Jirga Jhaveri, learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.2-State. Order in CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (REGULAR BAIL) NO. 1 of 2019 In R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 912 of 2019 The applicant is taken into custody the day on which the judgment was pronounced in the appeal. Hence, Notice returnable on 30th September, 2019. Ms.Jirga Jhaveri, learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.2-State. Order in CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (REGULAR BAIL) NO. 1 of 2019 In R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 912 of 2019 The applicant is taken into custody the day on which the judgment was pronounced in the appeal. He is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with surety of the like amount on the terms and conditions that may be imposed by the trial Court on further condition that, he shall deposit before this Court Rs.5 Lacs by tomorrow and remaining cheque amount after deducting the deposit made before the appellate Court, shall be deposited by him within a period of 4 (four) weeks from today. Bail bond shall be executed before the trial Court. The amount, as aforesaid, on deposit before the Court, shall be invested in cumulative Fixed Deposit and no loan or advance shall be raised over it. The original receipt of Fixed Deposit shall be kept with the Registry and shall be renewed from time to time till the disposal of this revision application. This application is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted”. 3.1. Later on 10.02.2021, upon receipt of the service of process of this Court, the respondents appeared and an additional affidavit came to be filed by the original complainant on 03.02.2021 through authorized officer and taking note of such contents of the affidavit, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to pass the following order :- “1. By way of this Criminal Misc. Application, the applicant – original complainant prays for modification of the order passed in Criminal Revision Application No.912 of 2019 with Criminal Misc. Application No.1 of 2019, directing the original petitioner – accused to deposit the entire cheque amount after deducting amount, which is already deposited before the Appellate Court, seeking withdrawal of the same as it is towards legally enforceable debt and the applicant – original complainant is entitled to the recovery. 2. Pursuant to the said order of bail in main Revision Application, the original petitioner – accused has already deposited the entire amount which has been ordered to be invested in Fixed Deposit. 2. Pursuant to the said order of bail in main Revision Application, the original petitioner – accused has already deposited the entire amount which has been ordered to be invested in Fixed Deposit. The applicant – original complainant has filed an affidavit, affirmed on 03.02.2021, stating that if the applicant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount, he has no objection in quashing and setting aside the order of imprisonment imposed upon the original accused. 3. In view of affidavit, the regular Court may be able to take up the Revision Application for the purpose of disposal. Therefore, permission for withdrawal of the amount can be granted by the Court concerned while finally disposing of the Revision Application. 4. Hence, Registry is directed to place the main matter being Criminal Revision Application No.912 of 2019 for the purpose of final hearing, after ascertaining the convenience of the Court concerned. 5. In view thereof, this application stands disposed of”. 3.2. Thereafter, the matter came to be adjourned from time to time and in the meantime, the settlement took place between the parties to the proceedings and as such, on 29.07.2021 with a view to produce the consent terms on record, time was sought and accordingly, the matter was adjourned to 03.08.2021. On 03.08.2021, a xerox copy of the consent terms was produced and the learned advocate appearing for respondent no. 1 – Bank Mr. Chirag B. Patel has sought time to respond to such consent terms and accordingly the matter was adjourned to 23.08.2021. 4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, both the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties have jointly submitted that the matter is resolved between the parties insofar as the grievance related to present proceedings are concerned and a copy of the consent terms came to be produced by the applicant - original complainant and learned advocate Mr. Chirag B. Patel has also tendered a copy of the signed consent terms by the respondent no.1 – Bank through its authorized officer (Manager In-charge) and has requested that the present Criminal Revision Application be disposed of in terms of settlement which took place between the parties and thereby requested that there is no objection if the orders impugned are quashed and set aside. It has further been submitted that in addition to the aforesaid consent terms there is an affidavit also filed by the authorized officer of respondent no. 1 – Bank – Mr. Himat Ahir S/o Gomanbhai Ahir in which it has been clearly observed that respondent no. 1 - Bank has no objection in quashing and setting aside punishment of one year simple imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner by the court below and has categorically stated that respondent no. 1 - Bank is reserving the right to initiate appropriate civil proceedings under appropriate law for recovery of unpaid accrued interest upon the defaulted hypothecation loan amount from the petitioner. The said affidavit is also affirmed and part of the record, which is produced at page 74 of the record of Criminal Misc. Application (Modification of Order) No. 1 of 2021 and based upon such affidavit as well consent terms, learned advocate Mr. Chirag B. Patel has submitted that since the parties to the proceedings have genuinely arrived at consent terms, respondent no.1 - Bank shall have no objection if the criminal proceedings are disposed of in terms of the settlement and thereby the impugned orders may be quashed and set aside, however, has submitted that the said consent terms are binding on both the sides and respondent no. 1 - Bank is reserving liberty to initiate civil proceedings for recovering of amount as indicated herein-above and specifically mentioned in the affidavit. 5. To this submission, Mr. R.Z. Shaikh, learned advocate for the petitioner has categorically accepted and confirmed the terms of the settlement and has assured that the petitioner has readily accepted the terms which are deduced in writing, a copy whereof is produced by learned advocate Mr. Chirag B. Patel on behalf of respondent no. 1 – Bank and has requested that the present proceedings be disposed of by taking on record the aforesaid consent terms. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has also no objection about any of the terms which are deduced in writing in consent terms and has requested the Court to terminate the present proceedings in terms of the settlement by quashing and setting aside the impugned orders. Learned advocate Mr. Shaikh has further submitted that the petitioner also no objection about the liberty being reserved in favour of respondent no. Learned advocate Mr. Shaikh has further submitted that the petitioner also no objection about the liberty being reserved in favour of respondent no. 1 Bank to initiate civil proceedings against the petitioner with respect to the claim for recovering unpaid accrued interest upon defaulted hypothecation loan amount and with this assurance has requested to dispose of the present proceedings. Both the learned advocates have identified the respective signatures which are reflecting in consent terms and have categorically stated that the terms are incorporated with freewill, without coercion and both the sides have rightly agreed for aforesaid terms to be observed. Hence, requested not to precipitate the matter any further and instead of dealing with the merit, in accordance with law the Criminal Revision Application may be disposed of in terms of settlement. 5.1. Learned advocate Mr. Shaikh has also readily agreed on instructions to deposit an amount of Rs.1 lakh to be deposited within a period of four weeks from today to the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority and has requested that normally in view of the Apex Court’s decision, when the proceedings are to be disposed of at High Court level, 15% of the cheque amount is to be paid in view of the guidelines, and however, has requested that since sizeable amount has been going away from the petitioner and respondent no. 1 - Bank is getting the amount back, in the present scenario of financial crunch in which the petitioner is passing through, instead of 15% amount, lump sum amount be quantified to a reasonable extent and upon hearing both the side, learned advocate Mr. Shaikh on instructions has readily consented to pay the amount of Rs. 1 lakh to be paid to the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks from today, to which, the petitioner would also file an undertaking within a period of one week from today and by assuring this, a request is made to dispose of the present Criminal Revision Application. 6. 1 lakh to be paid to the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks from today, to which, the petitioner would also file an undertaking within a period of one week from today and by assuring this, a request is made to dispose of the present Criminal Revision Application. 6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and having gone through the material on record, and in view of the consent terms which are placed on record, signed by the respective parties to the proceedings, the Court instead of going into the merit of the matter, is inclined to consider the joint request to allow the parties to compound the offence and permit the Criminal Revision Application to be disposed. At this stage, the Court is mindful of the proposition laid down by the Apex Court as well as the Division Bench of this Court and in such a situation, the Court has inherent jurisdiction to dispose of the proceedings in view of the settlement. The Court at this stage would like to reproduce the relevant extract from the said order passed by the Division Bench of this Court and by taking assistance from it, the Court is inclined to dispose of the present Criminal Revision Application in terms of the settlement and thereby quashed and set aside the impugned orders passed by the courts below. The said relevant extract reads as under :- “6. This court in the matter of Nitinbhai Mathurdas Thakkar & Others v. State of Gujarat and others, reported in 2005(3) GLR 2377 , has quashed the complaint when there was a compromise. The Hon’ble the Apex Court in the matter of State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy & others, reported in AIR 1977 SC 1489 has observed in para 7 as under :- “7. ……. In the exercise of this wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it come to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of process of the Court or that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding out to be quashed. The saving of the High Court’s inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution……..” 7. In view of the aforesaid situation which is prevailing on record, considering the underline object of Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case in which the discretion under the provision deserves to be exercised for compounding offence. 8. Accordingly, the present Criminal Revision Application is allowed. The impugned judgment and order passed in Criminal Case No. 26649 of 2015 by the learned 9th Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat dated 11.12.2018 as well as judgment and order passed in Criminal Appeal No. 307 of 2018 by the learned 10th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Surat dated 25.07.2019 are hereby quashed and set aside. It is made clear that the present disposal of the Criminal Revision Application is strictly in view of the consent terms which are deduced in writing, produced on record and both the sides are under obligation to scrupulously observe the said consent terms and in addition to it the petitioner is directed to deposit an amount of Rs.1 lakh by way of costs to the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority, within a period of four weeks from today and to that effect the petitioner shall file appropriate undertaking before this Court within a period of one week and the same be placed on record of the present proceedings. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present Criminal Revision Application stands disposed of in terms of the settlement and as a consequence thereof, the impugned orders are quashed and set aside and accordingly in view of Section 320(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner is acquitted from the charges levelled against him for the offence in question.