Putla Dany Ajay Kumar vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 8340 AP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8340 AP
Judgement Date : 4 November, 2022

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Putla Dany Ajay Kumar vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 4 November, 2022

        HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

                        IA No.3 of 2022
                            in/and
            Criminal Revision Case No.1007 of 2022

Common Order:

      This Criminal Revision Case has been filed against the

judgment, dated 28.09.2022, passed in Criminal Appeal No.229 of

2017 by the learned V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge,

Vijayawada, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the

learned I Special Magistrate, Vijayawada, in CC No.232 of 2017,

dated 08.09.2017.

2.    A private complaint has been filed as against the revision

petitioner herein for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act'). By judgment

dated 08.09.2017, the learned I Special Magistrate, Vijayawada,

found the revision petitioner herein guilty of the offence under

Section 138 of the NI Act and convicted and sentenced him to

undergo S.I for six (6) months and to pay a fine of Rs.5,00,000/- and

in default of payment of fine amount, he was ordered to undergo

simple imprisonment for a period of six (6) months. Out of the fine

amount, an amount of Rs.4,90,000/- was ordered to the complainant

as compensation under Section 357(1)(b) Cr.P.C. Against the said

conviction and sentence, the petitioner herein filed Criminal Appeal
                                     2


No.229 of 2017 on the file of the learned V Additional Metropolitan

Sessions Judge, Vijayawada. The said Criminal Appeal was dismissed

by the learned Sessions Judge by judgment dated 28.09.2022

confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned

Magistrate in CC No.232 of 2017.        Against the said judgment, the

petitioner/accused has filed the present Revision Case.

3.       Pending the Revision Case, both the parties have settled the

dispute amicably out of the Court at the intervention of their elders

and well wishers. In view of the settlement arrived between both the

parties, they filed IA No.3 of 2022 along with joint memo seeking to

permit them to compound the offence and to record the compromise.

4.       Today, when the case is called, both the revision petitioner and

the 2nd respondent/complainant are present before this Court. Both

the parties are identified by their respective counsel in the open

Court. This Court has questioned the de facto complainant with

regard to compromise and he has categorically stated to that extent

that he has voluntarily entered into compromise with the accused and

he received the entire cheque amount from the revision petitioner

herein towards full satisfaction of the aforesaid claim. He further

stated that he is not interested to prosecute the case and he has no

objection to acquit the accused of the said offence.

5. Therefore, as the parties have entered into a compromise and

compounded the offence in terms of Section 147 of the N.I. Act, this

Criminal Revision Case is allowed setting aside the impugned

judgment of conviction and sentence passed against the revision