Allowed

M.Ravi Kumar v. State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Mar 2021CRLRC/132/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants permission to compound and record a compromise in a cheque dishonour revision case. The High Court allowed the criminal revision, quashed the conviction and sentence of the revision petitioner, and ordered the refund of deposited amounts. The court acted upon the voluntary settlement entered by parties with elder intervention.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision case was allowed; conviction and sentence of CC No. 569 of 2016 were set aside; compromise recorded; deposit refunded to revision petitioner.

M.Ravi Kumar Vs State of Ap — Cheque Dishonour | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶2

I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of 2021

¶3

IN/AND

¶4

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.132 of 2019

¶5

ORDER :

¶6

I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of 2021

¶7

These miscellaneous petitions are filed by the petitionercomplainant seeking permission of this Court to record compromise and compound the offence in C.C.No.569 of 2016 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Ongole.

¶8

The petitioner herein, who is second respondent in the revision case, filed a complaint and the same was registered as C.C.No.569 of 2016 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Ongole against the revision petitioner for the offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. After trial, the learned Magistrate convicted the revision petitioner and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.19,38,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Assailing the same, the revision petitioner preferred Crl.A.No.74 of 2018 on the file of Judge, Family Court-cum-VII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Prakasam at Ongole and the same was dismissed. Consequently, the revision petitioner filed the present revision to set aside the conviction and sentence. The 2^nd respondent company also initiated arbitration proceedings vide A.R.C.No.63 of 2014, wherein the Arbitrator passed an award dated 18.04.2015 for Rs.39,96,813/- in favour of the 2^nd respondent-company.

¶9

During the pendency of revision, both the parties have entered into compromise at the intervention of elders. It is stated by the complainant that they received an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- towards settlement of loan from the revision petitioner. It is also stated by the

¶10

¶11

complainant that the revision petitioner can receive the amount deposited before the trial Court.

¶12

Both the revision petitioner and the 2^nd respondent are present and they are identified by their respective counsels and produced Photostat copies of Aadhar cards to prove their identity. Further, it is stated by both the parties that they have voluntarily entered into compromise due to intervention of elders and well wishers. The 2^nd respondent in the revision case submitted that in view of the compromise entered between the parties, continuation of criminal proceedings is not necessary and the offence can be compounded and Crl.R.C.No.132 of 2019 can be allowed.

¶13

Therefore, taking into consideration the facts of the case, as the parties have compromised, permission is granted to compound the offence and compromise is recorded as per the terms mentioned in the petitions. Accordingly, these petitions are ordered.

¶14

Criminal Revision Case No.132 of 2019

¶15

In view of the order passed in I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2021, this criminal revision case is allowed and the conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.569 of 2016 dated 05.03.2018 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Ongole as confirmed in Crl.A.No.74 of 2018 dated 11.02.2019 on the file of Judge, Family Court-cum-VII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Prakasam at Ongole. The amount, if any, deposited by the revision petitioner before the trial Court shall be refunded to him.

¶16

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed. No costs.

¶17

__________________________________ JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶18

16^th March, 2021 PVD

¶19

¶20

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶21

I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of 2021

¶22

IN/AND

¶23

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.132 of 2019

¶24

16^th March, 2021

¶25

PVD

M.Ravi Kumar v. State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Ravi Kumar v. State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arjun Lai Mali Vs State of Ap

Nakkalamitta Sreenivasulu Vs State of Ap

Dukka Somulamma Vs State Ofap

M.Ravi Kumar Vs State of Ap

Kalintha Bhanu Praksah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kalintha Bhanu Praksah Vs State of Ap