Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Maddula Muralidhar Rao vs Avula Prasad on 8 November, 2022
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of 2022
IN/AND
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO. 623 of 2018
COMMON ORDER:
This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner
aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.02.2018 passed in
Criminal Appeal No.179 of 2014 by the learned VIII
Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari,
Eluru, whereby and whereunder the judgment dated
27.08.2014 passed in C.C.No.53 of 2013 by the learned
Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, West
Godavari, Eluru was confirmed.
2. The facts that led to filing this Criminal Revision
Case, in brief, are that the 1st respondent herein filed
C.C.No.53 of 2013 on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Eluru, for
the offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act against the Revision petitioner. The said
C.C.was allowed and the revision petitioner herein was
found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138
of Negotiable Instruments Act and he was sentenced to
suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of six (06) months
and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to suffer
simple imprisonment for a period of 1 ½ month.
3. Aggrieved thereby, the revision petitioner herein
filed Criminal Appeal No.179 of 2014 on the file of the court
of the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge,
West Godavari, Eluru and the said appeal was dismissed
on 28.02.20218 by confirming the conviction and sentence
passed in C.C.No.53 of 2013.
4. Assailing the said judgment, the revision petitioner,
who was the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.179 of 2014
and accused in C.C.No.53 of 2013, preferred this Criminal
Revision Case.
5. Heard Sri Kambhampati Ramesh Babu, learned
counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri T.S.N.Sudhakar,
learned counsel for the 1st respondent/complainant and the
learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor for the 2nd
respondent-State.
6. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner and
the learned counsel for the 1st respondent/complainant
submitted that the matter is settled out of Court and
prayed to consider I.A.Nos.1 and 2 and 2022.
7. The 1st respondent/complainant filed I.A.No.1 of
2022 praying this Court to permit him to compromise the
case with the revision petitioner and also filed I.A.No.2 of
2022 stating that he has compromised the matter with the
revision petitioner and as per the terms of compromise, the
revision petitioner agreed to pay him a sum of
Rs.1,75,000/- towards full and final settlement of the
cheque amount and he has agreed to receive the same and
accordingly he has received the said amount and prayed
this Court to record the compromise and set aside the
conviction and sentence passed against the revision
petitioner. A joint memo of the revision petitioner as well
as the 1st respondent to the said effect was filed.
8.The revision petitioner and the 1st respondent are
present in person before this Court and their identity is
verified with Aadhar cards as well as by their respective
counsel.
9.In Damodar S.Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H1, the
Hon'ble Apex Court held that the Court, while exercising
power under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act,
can proceed to compound the offence even after recording
of conviction by the Courts below.
10. In view of the above settled principle of law, this
Court deems it proper to take into consideration the joint
memo filed by both the parties. The joint memo reveals
that at the intervention of elders and well wishers of both
the parties the matter was compromised and the 1st
respondent received Rs.1,75,000/- towards full and final
settlement of the cheque amount. Therefore, taking into
consideration the facts of the case and the joint memo filed
by the parties, permission is granted to compound the
offence and compromise is recorded.
11. Accordingly, I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of are allowed.
(2010) 5 SCC 663
12. In view of the orders passed in I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of
2022, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed setting aside
the judgment dated 28.02.2018 passed in Criminal Appeal
No.179 of 2014 on the file of the Court of the learned VIII
Additional District & Sessions Judge, Eluru. Consequently,
the judgment dated 27.08.2014 passed in C.C.No.53 of
2013 on the file of the Court of the learned Judicial
Magistrate of first Class, Special Mobile Court, Eluru is set
aside and the complaint in C.C.No.53 of 2013 is dismissed
and the accused (revision petitioner herein) is acquitted of
the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act. The fine amount if any paid by him shall
be refunded to him.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any,
shall stand closed.
________________________
JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Date : 26.09.2022
RR
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
I.A.No.1 & of 2022
IN/AND
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.623 of 2018
Date : 26.09.2022
RR
