THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.220 of 2003 DATED: 22-07-2010 ORDER: This revision is filed by the petitioner-accused, questioning the judgment, dated 07-02-2003, passed in Crl.A.No.198 of 2001 by the learned Sessions Judge, Warangal, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Warangal in C.C.No.80 of 2001. 2. Petitioner herein was tried by the learned Magistrate for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ( for brevity, ‘the Act’). Having analyzed the entire evidence on record, the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the petitioner herein-accused is guilty of the said offence and accordingly sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and also to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for one month. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner herein-accused filed Crl.A.No.198 of 2001 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Warangal, and the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the same. Hence, this revision. 3. While admitting this revision, this Court was pleased to suspend the sentence and released the petitioner on bail. During the pendency of this petition, it appears the petitioner-accused paid the entire amount of the cheque and the complainant filed Crl.M.P.No.5727 of 2004 on 23-06-2005, stating that the said cheque amount has been paid and the offence be compounded. The affidavit sworn to by the complainant, clearly indicates that he has no objection if the said offence alleged against the petitioner-accused is compounded. As the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act is compoundable and as the entire amount has already been paid, this Court is of the view that the said offence can be compounded. Accordingly, the same is compounded. 4. In the light of the above, the judgment, dated 20- 11-2001, in C.C.No.80 of 2001, passed by the learned Magistrate, is hereby set aside. If the fine amount is already paid, the same may be refunded to the petitioner herein-accused. 5. Accordingly, Criminal Revision Case is allowed. _______________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 22nd July, 2010. Tsy