Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/1280/2025 of Penmatsa Naga Vara Prasada Varma Vs Mudunuri Rambabu on 9 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1280/2025 Between: PENMATSA NAGA VARA PRASADA VARMA, S/O. SUBBARAJU,
APHC010595342025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1280/2025
Between:
PENMATSA NAGA VARA PRASADA VARMA, S/O. SUBBARAJU, AGED
ABOUT 45YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 201, MAHARAJA TOWERS, RAJESWARI NAGAR, KAKINADA, KAKINADA
DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. MUDUNURI RAMBABU, S/O. LATE SANYASI RAJU, AGED ABOUT 53
YEARSRAMMOHAN RAJA NAGAR, KAKINADA.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR,
HIGHCOURT
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH,
VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. MAKIREDDY MANOJ
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2. SRINIVASA RAO PAPPU
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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:
The instant Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 438 and 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking to modify the Order dated 05.12.2023 passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada in Crl.M.P.No.634 of 2023 in C.A.No.394 of 2023 by reducing the deposit condition from 20% to 5% of the cheque amount.
2. Heard Makireddy Manoj, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri Pappu Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for Respondent No.1. Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor is in attendance.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner has deposited two Demand Drafts of Rs.5,00,000/- in total Rs.10,00,000/- i.e., the subject cheque amount, before the Registry and has filed a memo to that effect vide Memo dated 16.03.2026. Learned counsel would further submit that a compromise may be recorded in this matter since the Petitioner has deposited the entire cheque amount.
4. Learned counsel for Respondent No.1 / Complainant would submit that, despite his efforts, he could not secure the presence of Respondent No.1 / Complainant before this Court. Hence prayed that a direction may be given to the learned Appellate Judge to record the compromise in this matter.
5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in view of the pendency of large number of cheque bounce cases, in its recent judgment in Sanjabij Tari vs. Kishore S.Borcar and another1 has issued certain guidelines to the Appellate Courts as well as Trial Courts, which deal with the matters pertaining to the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. For ready reference, the same are extracted hereunder: “38. Since a very large number of cheque bouncing cases are still pending and interest rates have fallen in the last few years, this Court is of the view that it is time to revisit and tweak the guidelines'. Accordingly, the aforesaid guidelines of compounding are modified as under:-
(a) If the accused pays the cheque amount before recording of his evidence (namely defence evidence), then the Trial Court may allow compounding of the offence without imposing any cost or penalty on the accused.
(b) If the accused makes the payment of the cheque amount post the recording of his evidence but prior to the pronouncement of judgment by the Trial Court, the Magistrate may allow compounding of the offence on payment of additional 5% of the cheque amount with the Legal Services Authority or such other Authority as the Court deems fit.
(c) Similarly, if the payment of cheque amount is made before the Sessions Court or a High Court in Revision or Appeal, such Court may compound the offence on the condition that the accused pays 7.5% of the cheque amount by way of costs.
(d) Finally, if the cheque amount is tendered before this Court, the figure would increase to 10% of the cheque amount.”
6. Considering the submissions made, and in view of the above guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, since the Petitioner has paid the entire cheque amount before this Court, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. Since the matter is pending before the Appellate Court, the learned Appellate Judge is directed to record the compromise in this matter.
Pending applications, if any, shall stands closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:10.04.2026 Dinesh
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Crl.R.C.No.1280 of 2025
Dt.10.04.2026
Dinesh