HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.SANTHOSH REDDY
I.A.No.1 OF 2022
IN/AND
Crl.R.C.No.101 OF 2018
JUDGMENT:
This criminal revision case is filed by the petitioner/ appellant/accused challenging the judgment dated 12.10.2017 passed in Crl.A.No.13 of 2017 by the learned II-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Medak at Sangareddy, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Special Mobile Court, Sangareddy, vide judgment dated 08.12.2016 in C.C.No.11 of 2015 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
2. During pendency of the criminal revision case, I.A.No.1 of 2022 came to be filed by the second respondent/complainant to record the compromise. Along with the petition, a joint memo which is signed by the parties and their counsel, photographs of the parties and photostat copies of their Aadhar Cards came to be filed. It is stated in the affidavit that at the intervention of elders and well wishers, the parties have settled their disputes and as per the 2 settlement arrived at, the revision petitioner has paid Rs.1,00,000/- towards full and final settlement.
3. Both the parties are present before this court today and they were identified by their respective counsel. This court, when examined, the second respondent/complainant submitted that out of his own volition and without there being any coercion, he has entered into compromise and he has no objection in case the petitioner is acquitted for the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
4. In Damodar S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal (H)1 the Apex Court has categorically held that "while exercising power under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Court can proceed with the compromise even after recording the conviction."
5. In view of the aforesaid principles laid down in the above decision, and in the light of the compromise arrived at between the parties, I.A.No.1 of 2022 is ordered.
6. Accordingly, the criminal revision case is allowed in terms of compromise, setting aside the judgments dated 1 (2010) 5 SCC 663 3 08.12.2016 and 12.10.2017 passed in C.C.No.11 of 2015, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Special Mobile Court, Sanga Reddy, Medak District and Crl.A.No.13 of 2017, on the file of the learned II-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Medak at Sangareddy respectively and the revision petitioner/accused is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. However, the revision petitioner is directed to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards costs before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad within a period of ten days from today and file proof of the same into the Registry.
7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.
______________________ A.SANTHOSH REDDY,J 13.06.2022 Note:
The Registry is directed to upload/furnish certified copy of the order only on deposit of the costs as ordered above.
(B/O) Lrkm