Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/1282/2015 of DADI LEELARANI, VISAKHAPATNAM DT., Vs STATE OF AP., REP PP AND ANR., on 29 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3560] THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1282/2015 Between: 1. DADI LEELARANI, VISAKHAPATNAM DT.,, W/O
APHC010765842015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1282/2015
Between:
1. DADI LEELARANI, VISAKHAPATNAM DT.,, W/O RARNALCRISTINA
SRINIVASA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O
D.NO.13-9-24,BOYINAVARI
STREET,
ANAKAPALLI,
VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. STATE OF AP REP PP AND ANR, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF A.P.
2. ADARI SURIBABU, S/O RAMUNAIDU, HINDU, AGED 57 YEARS, CULTIVATION RESIDING AT PANCHAYAT STREET, MUNAGAPAKA, MUNAGAPAKKA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
...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 this Memorandum of Criminal Revision Case aggrieved the judgment dt.06-07-2015 in CrI.A.No. 54 of 2011
in the court of the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Visakhapatnam dismissing the appeal and confirming the conviction and sentence imposed in judgment
C.C.No. 1 of 2010 dt 14-09-2011 in the court of the Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam District convicting the petitioner for offence under sections 138 r/w 142 of N.I.Act and sentencing petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months and to pay
compensation of Rs.25,000/- in default to pay compensation to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of 3 months.
IA NO: 1 OF 2015(CRLRCMP 2019 OF 2015
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 suspend the sentence of imprisonment imposed in judgment dt 14-092011 in
C.C.No. 1 of 2010 in the court of the Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam District as confirmed by judgment dt 06.07.2015 in CrI.A.No. 54 of 2011 in the court of the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Visakhapatnam and enlarge the petitioner on Bail pending the above CrI.R.c and pass such other order or orders in the circumstances of the case.
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. T V SRI DEVI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1282 OF 2015
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
1. The instant criminal revision case has been preferred against the order of conviction and sentence passed by learned trial court for the offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner frankly submits that his client is ready to repay the cheque amount to the de facto complainant.
3. By the order of learned trial court, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the complainant in a sum of Rs.25,000/-, which is equivalent to the impugned cheque amount. In default of payment, the petitioner was directed to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months.
4. On a plain perusal of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the offence of dishonour of cheque may be punished up to twice the cheque amount. In the present case, the petitioner, having been convicted, expresses his readiness to repay twice the cheque amount to the complainant.
5. Considering the facts and submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, the order of conviction passed by learned trial court is hereby modified. The sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months is waived. The petitioner is directed to pay compensation to the complainant in a sum of Rs.50,000/- within eight weeks from the date of this order. Since the 2nd respondent, who was the complainant, has expired, the petitioner shall deposit the amount before the learned trial court. The legal heirs of the 2nd respondent shall receive the said amount upon proper certification and verification.
6. Accordingly, the criminal revision case is disposed of.
7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal revision case shall stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA Dt.30.04.2026 BV