IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1894 OF 2004 Between: Dharmender Gupta .....PETITIONER AND Vikram Kumar Gupta and another ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1894 OF 2004 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case, under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the order, dated 02.11.2004, in Criminal Appeal No.351 of 2003, on the file of I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, whereunder and whereby, the conviction of the petitioner of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (for short, “the Act”) and sentence to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for further period of one month, recorded in judgment, dated 11.08.2003, in C.C.No.597 of 2002, on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, were confirmed. 2. The petitioner herein is accused and the first respondent herein is the complainant. Both the parties are present in the Court and they are identified by their respective counsel. The petitioner produced his Household Supply Card and the first respondent produced his Driving Licence, which reveal their respective identities. Both the parties stated that the matter has been compromised at the instance of the elders and the first respondent stated that he has no objection to acquit the petitioner/accused. 3. The petitioner was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act, which is a compoundable offence. There is no legal bar to record the compromise. Section 147 of the Act provides for compromise. In view of the fact that the matter has been settled outside the Court and the offence is compoundable in nature, permission can be accorded and therefore, permission is granted. Hence, the impugned judgments are liable to be set aside. 4. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed setting aside the judgment, dated 02.11.2004, in Criminal Appeal No.351 of 2003, on the file of I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. The petitioner is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act. Bail bonds, if any, of the petitioner shall stand cancelled. Fine amount, if any, paid by the petitioner shall be returned to him. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J July 16, 2010 MD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1894 OF 2004 July 16, 2010