CRLRC/448/2011 of PADALA HANUMANTHA RAO, KHAMMAM DISTRICT Vs SAIKAM DRONACHARYULU, KRISHN DISTRICT AND ANR, REP.BY PP,HYD on 27 July 2026

1. PADALA HANUMANTHA RAO, KHAMMAM DISTRICT, S/O. TIRUPATHI RAO R/O. PALVANCHA, KHAMMAM DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. SAIKAM DRONACHARYULU KRISHN DISTRICT AND ANR REP BY PP HYD, S/O.NAGALINGAM R/O. TIRUVURU, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

2. THE STATE OF A P, REPT. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P., HYDERABAD.

...RESPONDENT(S): Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to allow the present criminal revision case by setting aside the judgment dated 23-11-2010 passed by the Court of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court) Krishna, Machilipatnam in Crl.A.No.165 of 2009 confirming the judgment dated 22-09- 2009 passed by the Court of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tiruvuru, Krishna District in C.C.No.359 of 2006. IA NO: 1 OF 2011(CRLRCMP 665 OF 2011

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the conviction and sentence imposed in judgment dated 23-11-2010 passed by the Court of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court) Krishna, Machilipatnam in Crl.A.No.165 of 2009 confirming the judgment dated 22-09-2009 passed by the Court of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tiruvuru, Krishna District in C.C.No.359 of 2006 and consequently enlarge the petitioner on bail. IA NO: 1 OF 2026

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to permit the petitioners to compound the offence under Section 138 of NI Act and quash the proceedings in C.C.No.359 of 2006 on the file of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tiruvuru, Krishna District and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2026 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/1st respondent to record the compromise in C.C.No.359 of 2006 on the file of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tiruvuru, Krishna District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. M PHANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents:

1. V RAJA MANOHAR

2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following common order:

1. Instant criminal revision case has been preferred against judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kaikalur, against present petitioner/Accused in C.C.No.359 of 2006, which was confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.165 of 2009 on the file of VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Krishna,

Machilipatnam, whereby and whereunder the petitioner herein was convicted for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2. Pending consideration of the revision, the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court in presence of the elders of the village. Pursuant to the said settlement, the parties have filed I.A. No.1 of 2026 seeking permission to compound the offence and also filed I.A. No.2 of 2026 for recording the compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the 1st respondent/complainant.

3. Along with I.A. No.2 of 2026, the 1st respondent/complainant has also filed an affidavit stating that the dispute has been amicably settled outside the Court, that he has no objection if the criminal proceedings against the petitioner are quashed and filed a joint compromise memo duly signed by the petitioner as well as the 1st respondent/ complainant and attested by their respective learned counsel.

4. Both the petitioner and the 1st respondent/ complainant are present before this Court. On being queried, the 1st respondent/ complainant submitted before this Court that he has voluntarily signed the joint memo without any coercion, undue influence or compulsion. He further stated that he has no objection if the petitioner is acquitted by setting aside the conviction and sentence.

5. The petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The offence under Section 138

of the Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable under section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Since the parties have amicably settled their dispute and the 1st respondent/ complainant has voluntarily entered into the compromise and signed the joint compromise memo, there is no legal impediment to compound the offence against the present petitioner.

6. Accordingly, I.A. No.1 of 2026 and I.A. No.2 of 2026 are considered and allowed. The offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is permitted to be compounded in terms of compromise. Consequently, the conviction and sentence recorded by learned trial Court in C.C. No.359 of 2006 and confirmed by learned appellate Court in Crl.A.No.159 of 2009 against the petitioner is hereby set aside in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties. The petitioner is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

7. The criminal revision case is, accordingly, allowed.

8. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this revision shall stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA Dt.28.07.2026 BV