THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1692 OF 2002 ORDER: 1 This revision is directed against the judgment passed by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal in Crl.A.No.125 of 2000 dated 28.06.2002 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge while allowing the said appeal partly modified the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Warangal in C.C.No.626 of 1997 for the offence punishable under section 138 of N.I. Act. 2 Facts in brief are that during the course of business transactions between the petitioner and the complainant, and in discharge of the amount due by him to the complainant towards the cost of the cloth, the petitioner issued a cheque in favour of the complainant for Rs.70,000/- towards the stock of cloth supplied to him. The said cheque when duly presented to the Bank, was returned for the reason ‘insufficient funds’. Therefore, the complainant got issued a statutory legal notice to the accused i.e. petitioner and after having waited for the statutory period of 15 days after service of notice to enable the petitioner to pay the amount, filed the present complaint against the petitioner for the offence punishable under section 138 of N.I. Act. 3 The trial court having analysed the entire evidence both oral and documentary found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. As against the said judgment dated 20.04.2000 passed by the trial court, the accused preferred Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 2000 and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal, as stated supra, dismissed the said appeal, but, however, modified the said sentence of rigorous imprisonment of six months to that of three months by his judgment dated 26.06.2002. Hence the present revision. 4 Heard. 5 The appeal was dismissed on 26.06.2002 and this court granted bail on 13.11.2002. From the record it is clear that the petitioner was taken into custody on 07.11.2002 pursuant to the N.B.Ws issued by the court below and he came out only after this court granted bail on 13.11.2002. From the above it is clear that the petitioner was in jail for about 7 or 8 days. 6 In view of the fact that the said offence is of the year 1997 and as the accused was in jail for about 7 or 8 days, and inasmuch as the accused was made roaming form one court to another for all these years, this court is of the view that trauma which the accused has suffered all these years itself is a sufficient punishment for the offence committed by him. 7 Hence, in order to meet the ends of justice, this court, without going into the merits of the case, holds that the said sentence of three months simple imprisonment can be reduced to that of the period, which the petitioner had already undergone. 8 Excepting the above modification, this revision, in all other aspects, is dismissed. --------------- Kvsn 15.07.2010