Nagadesi Swamy Devanand v. Gudivada Varalakshmi

Andhra Pradesh HC5 May 2026CRLRC/3320/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compounding of Section 138 NI Act cheque dishonor offense on compromise; Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati; Justice Subhendu Samanta; Criminal Revision Case No. 3320 of 2017 with I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of 2026; petitioner Nagadesi Swamy Devanand; defacto-complainant Gudivada Varalakshmi; conviction in C.C.No.49/2013 by JMFC Chintalapudi dated 26.02.2016 confirmed in Crl.A.No.95 of 2016 by Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru dated 30.11.2017; conviction set aside as compounded, accused acquitted, sureties released; revision disposed 06.05.2026.

What did the court decide?

Order of conviction recorded in C.C.No.49 of 2013 and confirmed in Crl.A.No.95 of 2016 set aside as compounded; petitioner acquitted; sureties released; pending miscellaneous applications closed. ¶¶46

Nagadesi Swamy Devanand Vs Gudivada Varalakshmi — Cheque Dishonour | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Order of conviction recorded in C.C.No.49 of 2013 and confirmed in Crl.A.No.95 of 2016 set aside as compounded; petitioner acquitted; sureties released; pending miscellaneous applications closed.

¶¶46

Issue for consideration

Whether the offense under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, for which the petitioner stands convicted (as affirmed in appeal), can be compounded on the basis of the compromise between the petitioner and the defacto-complainant, warranting setting aside of the conviction and acquittal.

¶¶43

Court's answer

An offense punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is compoundable in nature; the compromise having been affected between the parties, the conviction in C.C.No.49 of 2013 (confirmed in Crl.A.No.95 of 2016) is set aside as compounded, the petitioner is acquitted, and the sureties are released.

¶¶46

Ratio / Principle

I.A. Nos. 1 and 2 of 2026 (permission to compound and recording of the compromise) are considered and allowed.

¶¶43

Key takeaways

The Criminal Revision Case is disposed of in terms of the above observations.ratio¶¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Revision (under Section 397/401 CrPC) against conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in C.C.No.49/2013 (JMFC, Chintalapudi, judgment dt.26-02-2016), confirmed in Crl.A.No.95 of 2016 by the Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru (dt.30-11-2017). During the pendency of the revision, the petitioner and the defacto-complainant filed I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2026 seeking permission to compound the offense and to record the compromise. Both parties appeared; the defacto-complainant acknowledged receipt of the amount and stated she signed the compromise voluntarily. Holding that an offense under Section 138 NI Act is compoundable and the compromise stood effected, the Court allowed the applications, set aside the conviction as compounded, acquitted the petitioner, released the sureties, and disposed of the revision, closing pending miscellaneous applications.

¶1

[3560]

¶2

APHC010958552017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA

¶8

I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of 2026

¶9

in/and

¶10

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 3320/2017

¶11

Between:

¶12

NAGADESI SWAMY DEVANAND, S/O. ELIYA, EMPLOYEE, O/O TAHSILDAR, T.NARASAPURAM, R/O. T.NARASAPURAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

GUDIVADA VARALAKSHMI, W/O. GANGADHARA RAO, GANTIVARI STREET, CHINTALAPUDI, WEST GODAVARI STREET.

¶16

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT HYDERABAD

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the CriminalRevisionCase, the High Court may be pleased toto present this Memorandum of Criminal Revision Case, having been aggrieved by the Judgment dt.30-11-2017 passed in Crl.A.No. 95 of 2016 on the file of the Prinicipal Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, confirming the convition and sentence imposed in C.C.No. 49/2013 dt.26-02-2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chintalapudi

¶19

IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLRCMP 5371 OF 2017

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with filing of the certified copy of the trial court judgment passed in

¶21

¶22

C.C.No. 49/2013 dt.26-02-2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chintalapudi, pending disposal of the main revision,

¶23

IA NO: 2 OF 2017(CRLRCMP 5372 OF 2017

¶24

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner herein on bail by suspending the sentence imposed in C.C.No. 49/2013 dt.26-02-2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chintalapudi, as confirmed in Crl.A.No. 95 of 2016 dt. 30-11-2017 on the ifle of the Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, pending disposal of the main revision

¶25

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶26

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to permit the Petitioner and Respondent view of the amicable settlement between the Petitioner and Respondent to compound the case by setting aside the Judgment dated herein in 1st 26.02.2016 passed in C.C.No.49 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Chintalapudi confirmed by the Judgment dated 30.11.2017 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 95 of 2016 on the file of the Court of the Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru and as acquit the 1st Respondent/Petitioner/Accused and pass

¶27

IA NO: 2 OF 2026

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to record the compromise by setting aside the Judgment dated 26.02.2016 passed in C.C.No.49 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of 1 Class, Chintalapudi as confirmed by the Judgment dated 30.11.2017 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 95 of 2016 on the file of the Court of the Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru and acquit the 1st Respondent/Petitioner/Accused and pass

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶30

1.Y N ANJANEYACHARYULU

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶32

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶33

2.VENKATESWARLU KOLLA

¶34

The Court made the following:

¶35

¶36

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA I.A.No.1 of 2026 and I.A.No.2 of 2026 In/And CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 3320/2017

¶37

COMMON ORDER :

¶38

I.A.No.01 of 2026 is filed seeking permission to file application for compounding the instant Criminal Revision Case.

¶39

I.A.No.02 of 2026 is filed for recording the compromise to compound the offence.

¶40

The instant Criminal Revision Case has been preferred against order of conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.49 of 2013 by learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chintalapudi which was confirmed by learned Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.95 of 2016. The petitioner was convicted under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881¹ (For brevity ‘the N.I.Act’).

¶41

At the stage of the instant Criminal Revision Case, both parties have filed an application for compromise vide I.A. No. 2 of 2026. Perused the application. The petitioner, Nagadesi Swamy Devanand S/o Eliya, and defacto-complainant, Gudivada Varalakshmi W/o Gangadhara Rao, appeared before this Court. On enquiry, the defacto-complainant submitted that she has received the amount and has signed the compromise application of her own accord, without any compulsion. She further submitted that he has no objection to the petitioner being released.

¶42

Having heard learned counsels for the parties.

¶43

Considering I.A. Nos. 1 and 2 of 2026, it appears that the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is liable to be compounded in terms of the compromise. Accordingly, the applications in I.A. Nos. 1 and 2 of 2026 are considered and allowed.

¶44

1 The N.I.Act,1881

¶45

¶46

The offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is compoundable in nature. Compromise has been affected between the parties. Accordingly, the order of conviction recorded against the present petitioner in C.C.No.49 of 2013 by learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chintalapudi, and confirmed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari At Eluru, in Crl. A. No. 95 of 2016, is hereby set aside as compounded. Consequently, the present petitioner is acquitted of the case. The sureties are also released.

¶47

Under the above observations, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of.

¶48

Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶49

__________________________ JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA

¶50

Dated:06.05.2026. SSA

Nagadesi Swamy Devanand v. Gudivada Varalakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagadesi Swamy Devanand v. Gudivada Varalakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kosuru Subramanyam Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Tarun Sai Gadde Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

G. Venkateswarlu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Nagireddygari Viswanatha Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Pamula Subbayamma, Vs The State of A.P.

Belagalu Naganna Goud Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh