Telangana High Court
P.Rajesh Kumar Reddy, Hyderabad., vs G.Venkateswara Reddy, Hyd And Anr, Rep ... on 25 April, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
I.A.No.1 of 2024
In/And
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2135 of 2016
COMMON ORDER:
-
The Criminal Revision Case is filed aggrieved by the
judgment dated 21.07.2016 in Criminal Appeal No.520 of 2014
on the file of the learned V Additional Metropolitan Sessions
Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad (for
short, "the appellate Court") modifying the judgment dated
25.06.2014 in C.C.No.221 of 2013 (old C.C.No.1233 of 2013) on
the file of the learned IV Special Magistrate, Kukatpally, at
Miyapur (for short, "the trial Court").
2. Heard Mr. P.Yajur, learned counsel representing
Mr. Chetluri Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Ms. B.Naga Pravalika Goud, learned counsel for respondent
No.1 and Mr. Vizarath Ali, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
appearing for respondent No.2-State.
3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel
for the petitioner submitted that both the parties have entered
into compromise and settled the matter out of Court and that
the terms of compromise were reduced into writing in the form
of memorandum of compromise and that I.A.No.1 of 2024 has
been filed seeking permission of this Court to compound the
offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and
record the terms of compromise between the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that,
pursuant to the order dated 19.04.2024 passed by this Court,
the petitioner paid Rs.2,500/- to the credit of the High Court
Legal Services Committee, High Court of Telangana, at
Hyderabad and Rs.2,500/- to the credit of Telangana High
Court Advocates Association vide receipt Nos.1498 dated
24.04.2024 and INV042447855 dated 22.04.2024 respectively
and seeks to allow the Revision.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor as well as learned
counsel for unofficial respondent No.1 concedes to the same.
6. The appearances of the petitioner and unofficial
respondent No.1 are dispensed with.
7. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties no
purpose would be served in keeping the proceedings pending.
Having regard to the enabling provision of Section 320 of
Criminal Procedure Code permission is accorded and the
compromise is recorded.
8. Accordingly, the I.A.No.1 of 2024 and the Criminal
Revision Case are allowed and the conviction and sentence
recorded against the petitioner in judgment dated 21.07.2016 in
Criminal Appeal No.520 of 2014 on the file of the learned V
Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District,
at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad, modifying the judgment dated
25.06.2014 in C.C.No.221 of 2013 (old C.C.No.1233 of 2013) on
the file of the learned IV Special Magistrate, Kukatpally, at
Miyapur, is hereby set aside. Consequently, the
petitioner/accused shall be set at liberty, forthwith, if he is not
required in any other case or crime. The memo shall form part
of this order.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in this Revision,
shall stand closed.
___________________________
JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL
Date: 25.04.2024
ESP
