Allowed

Muppidi Yuva Raju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Sept 2022CRLP/3560/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a case under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashment of an impugned order quashing a docket order and conviction for cheque dishonour, the court permitted the parties to compromise. Finding the compromise voluntary, the court set aside the conviction and sentence, acquitting the accused.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and sentence set aside; accused acquitted; Criminal Petition allowed; I.A.Nos. allowed.

Muppidi Yuva Raju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Cheque Dishonour | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶2

I.A.Nos.1 of 2022 and 2 of 2022 in Criminal Petition No.3560 of 2021 and Criminal Petition No.3560 of 2021

¶3

COMMON ORDER :

¶4

Criminal Petition No.3560 of 2021 is filed, under

¶5

Section 482 CrPC, seeking to quash the Docket Order dated 30.08.2019 in Crl.M.P. No.376 of 2019 in Criminal Appeal (SR) No.2471 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, whereby the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the petition filed seeking to condone delay of 25 days in preferring the Criminal Appeal.

¶6

The petitioner/accused was tried for an offence for the offence punishable under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in C.C. No.871 of 2016 on the file of the Special Magistrate,

¶7

Tanuku, filed by 2^nd respondent/complainant, and vide judgment dated 01.02.2019, he was convicted of the said offence and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment

¶8

¶9

for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months. Challenging the same, he preferred Criminal Appeal (SR) No.2471 of 2019 before the learned Sessions Judge along with a petition in Crl.M.P. No.376 of 2019 seeking to condone delay of 25 days in preferring the appeal. Vide the impugned Order dated 30.08.2019, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the said petition, as there was no representation for him and costs also not paid and condition also not complied with. Aggrieved by the said order, the present Criminal Petition is preferred.

¶10

During pendency of the Criminal Petition, 2^nd respondent/complainant filed I.A.Nos.1 of 2022 and 2 of 2022 seeking to permit him to compound the offence and to record the compromise arrived at, between the parties. A Memorandum of Compromise and a Joint Memo, signed by both the parties is annexed to I.A.No.2 of 2022.

¶11

¶12

Today, petitioner and 2^nd respondent are

¶13

present before the Court. They are identified by their respective counsel. They filed copies of their respective Aadhar cards. Originals are produced for perusal of the Court. 2^nd respondent/complainant stated that at the intervention of elders, he settled the subject dispute with the petitioner/accused and in view of the compromise arrived at, between the parties, he is not interested in pursuing the matter further, and he prays the Court to allow the Criminal Petition and quash the proceedings.

¶14

A perusal of the Memorandum of Compromise

¶15

and the Joint Memo, signed by both the parties, annexed to I.A.No.2 of 2022 goes to show that pursuant to the settlement arrived at, between the parties, 2^nd respondent/ complainant has no objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused.

¶16

This Court is satisfied with the identification

¶17

of the parties and voluntariness in arriving at the compromise. In view of the same, there is no hindrance

¶18

¶19

to permit the parties to compromise. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence recorded in the judgment dated 01.02.2019 in C.C. No.871 of 2016 on the file of the Special Magistrate, Tanuku, against the appellant/ accused, which is subject matter of Criminal Appeal (SR) No.2471 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, are set aside. The petitioner/accused is found not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 r/w 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and is acquitted of the said offence in terms of Section 320 (8) Cr.P.C.

¶20

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶21

I.A.Nos.1 of 2022 and 2 of 2022 are allowed.

¶22

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition, shall stand closed.

¶23

___________________________________ JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶24

05.09.2022. DRK

¶25

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶27

COMMON ORDER in

¶28

I.A.Nos.1 of 2022 and 2 of 2022 in Criminal Petition No.3560 of 2021

¶29

and

¶30

Criminal Petition No.3560 of 2021

¶31

DRK

¶32

05.09.2022

Muppidi Yuva Raju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muppidi Yuva Raju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Ganesh Vs State of Ap

N.J.Ramesh Vs State of Ap

Ravi Ramesh Vs The State of A.P.

Ch.Srinivas Vs State of A.P

Karam Sagar Vs the Public Prosector

Tommandru Apparao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh