1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. Leave granted.

3. The appellant before us was convicted by the XIIIth Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in default to pay the same, to undergo simple imprisonment for four months.

4. The appeal filed against the said judgment of the Trial Court was dismissed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore and a criminal revision petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code was partly allowed by the High Court which held that the appellant should pay a fine twice the cheque amount, in default the appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year. It is the said order of the High Court that is challenged in this appeal.

5. During the pendency of this appeal the parties have settled their dispute which is recorded by this Court by order dated 18.8.2003. Now the appellant seeks for the compounding of the said offence. In view of the provision of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 this Court in the case of Anil Kumar Haritwal v. Alka Gupta, IV (2004) SLT 959=III (2004) CCR 74 (SC)=(2004) 4 SCC 366, has held that such a compounding of the offences on the basis of parties settling their dispute is permissible. Since the respondent states that he is willing to compound the offence, we allow the appeal and direct that the offences be compounded as provided under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

6. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that pursuant to the direction of the Trial Court, he has deposited a sum of Rs. 20,000/- and in view of the settlement he is entitled to withdraw the same. We direct the Trial Court that the abovesaid sum, if deposited, will be returned back to the appellant herein.

7. For the reasons stated above, we set aside the sentence imposed on the appellant in view of subsequent events and allow this appeal.