IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWELTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C.NO : 638 OF 2003 Between: Smt. U.Bhadramani ..... PETITIONER AND The State of AP rep. by its Public prosecutor, AP High Court, Hyderabad and another. .....RESPONDENT(S) HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C.No. 638 of 2003 JUDGMENT: The petitioner herein was tried in C.C.No.933 of 1999 on the file of XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned Magistrate, on appraisal of the entire evidence, came to the conclusion that the petitioner was found guilty of the offence and accordingly sentenced her to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The same was questioned by the petitioner by filing Crl.A.No.340 of 2002 on the file of the VII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, and the said appeal was dismissed by the learned Judge by his Judgment dated 08-04-2003. The same is questioned in this revision case. 2. This Court, while admitting revision on 01-05-2003, granted bail to the petitioner. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, both the parties are present and the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter between the parties was settled out of Court and the petitioner has paid an amount of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant by way of a demand draft bearing No.191721, dated 04-08-2010, drawn in favour of T.Satyanarayana-complainant payable at Syndicate Bank, Abids Road, Hyderabad, which is placed before the Court and when questioned the complainant, he stated that the matter is settled. 3. In the light of the said compromise entered into between the parties and an amount of Rs.25,000/- has been paid to the complainant, and the petitioner was in jail for sometime, this Court is of the view that there is no need of sentencing the petitioner to jail further. Accordingly, the sentence of six months imposed by the trial Court is reduced to that of the period already she has undergone. 4. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. ___________________ 12th August 2010 KVR