Allowed

Doddapaneni Koteswari v. Mannava Prabhu Das

Telangana HC7 Mar 2011CRLRC/290/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The criminal revision petitioner was convicted for cheque bounce. On presentation, the respondent stated he received the amount and withdrew the complaint. The court held the offence was compounded and set aside the conviction and sentence.

What did the court decide?

The revision is allowed and the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner are set aside. The offence is compounded.

Doddapaneni Koteswari Vs Mannava Prabhu Das — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.290 OF 2011

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

1 The first respondent herein filed a complaint against the petitioner herein alleging an offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and the same was numbered as C.C.No.33 of 2009 before the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tenali, Guntur District. After a detailed trial, the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the petitioner is guilty of the said offence and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and also to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- payable to the first respondent as provided under section 357 Cr.P.C.. Petitioner questioned the said judgment dated 29.06.2010 by way of filing Criminal Appeal No.304 of 2010 and the learned XI Additional District Judge (FTC) Guntur at Tenali dismissed the said appeal by judgment dated 08.02.2011. The same is questioned in this revision.

¶4

2 As the petitioner expressed his willingness to pay the cheque amount this court ordered notice to the respondent / complainant on 11.2.2011 and suspended the said sentence of imprisonment imposed by the courts below on the petitioner. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, the respondent by name Mannava Prabhu Das appeared before the court and when questioned he stated that he received the amount and he further stated that he is withdrawing the said complaint filed against the petitioner herein.

¶5

3 As the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable and since the complainant himself has come

¶6

forward stating that he received the entire amount and he has no objection if the said case is closed, this court is of the view that the said offence can be compounded and accordingly the said offence is compounded.

¶7

4 In the result, the revision is allowed and the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner by the courts below are hereby set aside.

¶8

_____________ 7^th March 2011

¶9

Kvsn

Doddapaneni Koteswari v. Mannava Prabhu Das

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Doddapaneni Koteswari v. Mannava Prabhu Das

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

Kanaparthy Ram Prasad, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kanaparthy Ram Prasad, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Karukonda Archana, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K.Pawan Kalyan, Vs D.Kiran Kumar

Shaik Mohammad Jafer Vs Shaik Jasmin

Shaik Sajid Saleen Vs Asia Begum