Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 71412 (BOM)

CHETAN SUNDARDAS KAJARIYA v. MILIND SURENDRA SHEDBALE AND ANR

REVN/97/2020 · 2025-12-19

Shri Shivkumar Dige

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

7-REVN-97-2020 (CR).DOC Harish IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION RIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 97 OF 2020 Chetan Sundardas Kajariya ...Applicant Versus Milind Surendra Shedbale And Anr ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 98 OF 2020 Chetan Sundardas Kajariya ...Applicant Versus Milind Surendra Shedbale And Anr ...Respondents ------- Adv. Anand Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. Adv. Sumit Vhanbathe a/w Adv. Aditya Raktade, Advocate for Respondent. Mr. Milind Surendra Shedbale, Respondent No. 1 present in person. Mr. Anand Subhash Shalgaonkar, APP for the Respondent-State. ------- CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 19th DECEMBER, 2025 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant, learned counsel for Respondent No. 1and learned APP for the Respondent State. 2. Learned counsel for the respective parties submits that the matter is settled out of the Court. They tendered consent terms. It is taken on record and marked as “X” for identification. The HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Digitally signed by HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Date: 2025.12.23 18:22:30 +0530 7-REVN-97-2020 (CR).DOC respresentative of the Applicants and the Respondent No. 1 is present in Court. This Court inquired them. They agreed the terms mentioned in the consent terms and singed on it. 3. Considering the submissions of both the learned counsel and in view of the consent terms, the Revision Applications are allowed. 4. The Applicant is acquitted for offences punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)