Allowed

T.v.Sreenivasa Rao, v. Annavaram Brahmam

Telangana HC5 Dec 2014CRLRC/75/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order records a compromise in a criminal revision proceeding regarding an offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court allowed the revision, setting aside the confirmation of conviction and modified sentence, permitting the parties to compound the offence.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment confirming conviction and modifying sentence set aside; parties permitted to compound the offence.

T.v.Sreenivasa Rao, Vs Annavaram Brahmam — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI

¶2

CRL.R.C.M.P.No.4086 of 2014 In/And CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.75 of 2008

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Challenging the judgment dated 14.12.2007 passed by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Krishna, Machilipatnam in Crl.A.No.42 of 2005 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge while confirming the conviction passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Avanigadda vide judgment dated 07.04.2005 in CC.No.198 of 2002 had modified and reduced the substantive sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment from one year to six months, the accused/petitioner herein had preferred the present revision.

¶5

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, both the counsel had filed Crl.R.C.M.P.No.4086 of 2014 stating that the parties have entered into a compromise and prayed for granting permission to compound the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed against the petitioner-accused.

¶6

3. Both the parties as well as their counsel have signed on the joint memo of compromise annexed to Crl.R.C.M.P.No.4086 of 2014. The parties, who are present, have also asserted the terms of compromise. A perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the petition goes to show that the matter was settled between the parties.

¶7

4. In view of the amicable settlement arrived between the parties and in view of the nature of the proceedings and the enabling provision under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in regard to compounding of the offence under the said Act, Crl.R.C.M.P.No.4086 of 2014 is ordered and the compromise is recorded. Consequent thereto, Crl.R.C.75 of 2008 is

¶8

allowed setting aside the judgment dated 14.12.2007 in Crl.A.No.42 of 2005 on the file of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Machilipatnam confirming the conviction and modifying the sentence imposed by the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Avanigadda vi de judgment dated 07.04.2005 in C.C.No.198 of 2002. It is directed that the compromise petition shall form part of the record. No order as to costs.

¶9

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this revision shall stand closed.

¶10

_______________________ M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J

¶11

5^th December 2014 Vjl

T.v.Sreenivasa Rao, v. Annavaram Brahmam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.v.Sreenivasa Rao, v. Annavaram Brahmam

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

G.Eswaramma Vs The State of A.P.

M.a.Saleem Vs The State of Ap.

Medini Prakash, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Raghu Goud Vs Ramakrishna Karjee

C.S.Narayana Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M. Subramuneiah, Vs Smt. B. Krishnaveni