Allowed

Sunekar Reddy Ramesh Goud alias Sunekar Rao Ramesh Goud v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC4 Sept 2023CRLRC/1453/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision regarding a conviction under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court allowed an application to compound the offence based on an amicable settlement and joint memo, resulting in the accused's acquittal and disposal of the revision.

What did the court decide?

The offence is compounded; Rs.3,50,000/- is permitted to be withdrawn by Respondent No.2; the conviction and sentence are set aside and the accused is acquitted; Criminal Revision Case is disposed of.

Sunekar Reddy Ramesh Goud alias Sunekar Rao Ramesh Goud… — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

13217l

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

|.A.NOS.1 AND 2 0F 2023 IN/ANO

¶7

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1453 OF 2019

¶8

Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397^{and 401 of CrPCagainst} the Judgment daled 04t11t2019 made in Crl.A.No.96^{ot 2016on the file of the} court oflhe Vll Additional District and Sessions^{Judge,Bodhanpreferredagainst} the Order daled 291O912016^passed in C.C.No.^{230 ot 2014 on the file of the} Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at^Bodhan.

¶9

Between:

¶10

Sunekar Reddy Ramesh Goud alias Sunekar Rao^{Ramesh Goud,S/o Rama} Goud, aged A6out 40 Years, Occ. Presently^{bankrupted R/o SharbathiCanal} Area Neir Maha Laxmi Cornplex, Bodhan Town, District^Nizamabad

¶11

...Petitioner/AppellanUAccused

¶12

AND

¶13

1 The State of Telangana Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,^{High Court of} Judicature at Hydeiabad For the State of Telangana,^Hyderabad.

¶14

2 Kamalakar Reddy, S/o Yadava Reddy, Aged About^{70 Years, Occ.} Agriculturist R/o Rakasapet, Bodhan Town,^{DistrictNizamabad}

¶15

...Respondents/RespondenUComplainant

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶17

Petition under Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C^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 on bail by suspending the sentence^{imposed by} the Judicial First class Magistrate at Bodhan^{in C.C No. 230 ot 2014' Dated29th} day of September 2016, directing this revision^{Petitionerto undergorigorous} lmprisonment for a Period of one Year^{and directed to. pay compensationon Rs} 1o:5o,ooo/ - along with interest @ B {percent) Per^{Annum,from the date of} issuance of the cheques that is 2110712014^{to the respondent No.2 herein,in} default of Payment of compensation, directed^{revision Petitionerto suffer simple} imprisonment for a Period of three Months and^{modificationof the Crl.Appeal} No.96 of 20'16 dated 04t1112O19 on ttre fite of^{ttre Vll Additional Districtand} sessions Judge, Bodhan, since Learned Judge,^{while modifyingthe appeal,}

¶18

sentence the revision petitioner, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one.Year and to^pay compensation of is r6,sopoot'_ to the z"J nu.po"olrt herein within three months from the oate or ordeiitit r. o+lr 112019, in defaurt of Paying the compensation amount, directed the revision petitionei i.-;;;;;g; simple imprisonment for three months, pending disposal of the above criminal revision case.

¶19

lA NO: 2 oF 2023

¶20

BETWEEN:

¶21

Kamalakar Reddy, S/o yadava Reddy, Aged About 70 years, Occ. AgriculturistR/oRakasapet,Bodh;;f;;"n;biiirt".TNirrrro"o

¶22

...Petitioner/Respondent No.2

¶23

AND

¶24

The State of Telanoana.E=.p gV its public prosecutor, High Court of J udicature at Hydeiabad F6i t L'5iit";i ieiIi;r n", Hyderabad.

¶25

...RespondenURespondent

¶26

2' Sunekar Reddv Ramesh Goud arias sunekar Rao Ramesh Goud, s/o Rama Goud, .aged.ASout ao Veais-,-6;: p;#ty ;litrupteo R/o Sharbathi Ca nat Area Nea r Ma ha Laxm i c omptex, eoo n-a-n'it rii, ostriii*i,il$;;''"' "- "

¶27

...RespondenUpetitioner

¶28

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the p"i,tion, ih" iisi-'' court may be preased to 1.."_9-"^{gglnPorndoffence,with respondentNo.Z/n.ri.ion petitioner} in Crl.R.C.No. 1453 of 2019.

¶29

lA NO: t oF 2023

¶30

BETWEEN:

¶31

Kamalakar Reddy, S/o yadava Reddy, Aged About 70 years, Occ. Agricutturist R/o Rakasapet, Bodha;f;;;;bi"iri""TNi"..rn"o"o

¶32

...petitioner/Respondent No.2

¶33

AND

¶34

1 The State of Telanoana R"p .gy its public prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hydeiabad roitr'e slite or reiiiilil]'ilvoeraoaa.

¶35

...RespondenURespondent

¶36

2 F[*l,b,^,""tiHik;:rffJ;#+f ]ffi^{.firuii"9",:',,"'1,,:B:ffi}

¶37

...RespondenUpetitioner

¶38

Petition under Section 151 .^{Cpc prayingthat in the circumsiances} stated in ["-:,Iltyn^{fited in support of the peiitio;, ih;;is;} Court may be pteased ro Hermrssron the petitioner to, Record . ._"rpL;i".., rn between petitioner/ Respondent No 2 and respondent rvo.zl n"ri-.rlr"iltirior", in consequentiaryl acquit respondent No.2/ revlsion petitioner t" diiii.b.'ru".r 4s3 ot 2019

¶39

Counsel for the petitioner in CRLRC No..t453 of 2O19 and for Respondent No.2 in LA.1 and 2 ot 2023

¶40

Counsel for the Respondent No.'t in CRLRC No.1453 ot ZO,tg and for Respondent No.1 in 1.A.1 and 2 of 2023

¶41

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 in CRLRC No.1453 ot 2O1g and for Petitioner No.1 in 1.A.1 and 2 of 2023

¶42

: M/S. M RATHAN SINGH

¶43

: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶44

: SRl. JALLT KANAKATAH

¶45

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶46

I I I i

¶47

¶48

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

¶49

S. AND 2 AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 453 0F 2019

¶50

ORDER:

¶51

This revision has been filed assailing rhe judgment dared 04.LL.2019 in Crl.ANo. 96 of 2016 passed by the leamed VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bodhan whereby conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Insrruments Acr, 1881(for short the 'N.I.Act) recorded in the judgment dated 29.09.2016 in CCNo.230 of 20t4 passed by the Judicial IMagistrate of Firsr Class, Bodhan was confirmed. However, modified the sentence by setring aside the interest awarded on the compensation amount at 8o/o p.a. from the date of issuance of the cheque.

¶52

Pending revision, rhe respondent No.2/complainant filed application seeking permission to the revision peritioner ro compound the offence in terms of rhe compromise in the joint

. memo.

The revision^{petitioner and respondentNo'2are Presentm} person. On^{enquiryboth of them submittedthat they have} amicably^{settledthe issue in the revisioncase in terrm of joint} memo and^{the revision petitioner has no objectionand} respondent^{No.2,/complainant may be permitted to wthdraw} Rs.3,5O,OO0/-^{in l.A No'1 of 2Ol9'}

¶57

The ioint^{memofiled bythe parties is discloshg that they} have amicably^{setdedthe dispuebetween themselvesand the} respondent^{No.2is readyto compound the offence'}

¶58

In^{view of the compromiseberween the panies and the} dispute^{being personal in nature, this C-ourt is of the considered} opinion^{that perminingthe respondentNo2 and the revision} petitioner^{for semlement of the issue in the revision in termsof} joint memo would^{be in the interestof justice'}

¶59

Accordingly,^{I.ANos'l arr'd2 arcallosredof' consequendy'} the offence^{under Section 138 of ttre N'I' Act recordedagainst} the revision^{petitioner/accused is compounded and respondent} No.2 is permined^{to withdraw Rs'3'50'O0o/-depositedby the}

¶60

¶61

revision pedtioner as per the directions of this C.ourt.^{In effect,} the conviction and sentence approved in the impugned^judgment dated 04.11.2019 in Crl.ANo.96 of 2016 passed by the^leamed VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bodhan is set aside and the accused is acquined.

¶62

In the above terrns, the Giminal Revision Gse is disposed

¶63

¶64

As a sequel pending, miscellaneou petitions if any, stands

closed

B?;LS?t'dS'lTfl:

,/TRUE^COPY/'

SECTION^OFFICER

To,

The^{Vll AdditionalDistrict and Sessions Judge'Bodhan (With records, if} , ?l? {e'"' "' .F,sl .cjTf ,llxi^{.;ll,t',:l:::::':} tHJ[^{l-i'] "'.} ] : :ll ^ " ",

¶72

i ?,li 33i",ii'.:^{H,f;t'#i"Li,,i,i'ri,g'nCo,.tto, in-.-dtateor reransana at} Hvderabad IOUTI

¶73

s. ljLl"#iiinr. 'thllt^{xRrunxRlAH' Advocate [oPUC]}

¶74

Two^{CD CoPies}

o'* os9

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:04 l0gl2023

ORDER

20 iii
(rri?
o.
v*
',k
PAT

¶81

tA { AND 2 0F 2023 IN/AND CRLRC.No.1453 of 2019

¶82

DISPOSING OF THE CRLRC

¶83

dkvsx

Sunekar Reddy Ramesh Goud alias Sunekar Rao Ramesh Goud v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunekar Reddy Ramesh Goud alias Sunekar Rao Ramesh Goud v. The State of Telangana and another

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

Subrahmanyam K.B.M.V. Vs the State Oftelangana

M/s Rachana Pet Vs The State of Telangana

M.J.Hameema Vs M.John Peter and another

T. Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Mariyala Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

Vempati Srinivas Vs the State of Telangana