HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1810 OF 2003 Dated 14-6-2010 Between: K.Kondanna. …Petitioner. And: B.Satyanarayana and another. …Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1810 OF 2003 ORDER: Aggrieved by the judgment passed on 29-11-2003 in Criminal Appeal No.302 of 2003 by the learned 4th Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, confirming the conviction against the petitioner-accused passed by the learned 2nd Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.260 of 2002, on 30-7-2003, the present revision is preferred by the petitioner. Petitioner herein is the sole accused and the respondent herein is the complainant before the Court below. The facts leading to file the present revision case are in a nutshell as follows: The petitioner approached the respondent for hand loan of Rs.50,000/- on 5-6-1999 and accordingly on 5-7-1999, the respondent paid the cash of Rs.50,000/- and executed a promissory note agreeing to repay the same with interest at 2.5% p.a.,. Again the petitioner approached the respondent for another hand loan of Rs.50,000/- promising to repay the same along with the previous debt by disposing of his house property. Accordingly in November, 1999, the loan of Rs.50,000/- was given to the petitioner on executing a promissory note on 5-11-1999 agreeing to repay the same with interest. Subsequently in spite of repeated demands, the petitioner did not discharge the debt. Subsequently, on the intervention of elders, the petitioner issued three cheques dated 5-5-2002 for Rs.1,10,000/-, Rs.50,000/- and Rs.20,000/- respectively drawn on S.B.I. Chandulal Baradari Branch Hyderabad towards final settlement of the entire debt. When the cheques were presented, they were dishonoured for want of insufficient funds. In spite of demands, the petitioner failed to discharged the same. Even though the petitioner was issued a legal notice got issued by the respondent- complainant under Ex.P.8, he did not respond and failed to repay the entire debt. Subsequently, the respondent filed C.C.No.1015 of 2002 before the learned 4th Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad for the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act against the petitioner and the same is pending. Subsequently, the present complainant has been filed. Before the trial Court, the respondent-complainant examined himself as P.W.1 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.11 besides examining P.W.2 who is one of the attestors of the promissory note under Ex.P.3. The trial Court having observed that the respondent proved the offence under Section 138 N.I. Act beyond reasonable doubt against the petitioner-accused, convicted the accused. Having aggrieved by the same, the petitioner-accused carried the matter to the 1st appellate Court and the 1st appellate Court after reappreciation of evidence available on record, dismissed the appeal confirming the impugned judgment of the trial Court and directing the petitioner-accused to surrender before the trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision has been preferred by the petitioner. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the judgments impugned. On 12-4-2010, both parties have agreed before this Court for settlement of the matter. As per the settlement arrived at by the parties in the Court hall, the petitioner-accused has to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) to the respondent-complainant and out of the said amount, the petitioner/accused has paid an amount of Rs.80,000/-(Rupees eighty thousand only) to the respondent- complainant. Later, the matter was adjourned to today i.e., 14-6-2010 for payment of the balance amount of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees seventy thousand only) by the petitioner-accused. Today, the petitioner-accused paid the remaining of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees seventy thousand only) to the respondent-complainant and the same was acknowledged by the complainant. At this juncture, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that while arriving at settlement between the petitioner and the complaint, the complainant accepted to not press the complaint pending before the learned 5th Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad in C.C.No.1015 of 2002. In view of the payment of the remaining amount by the petitioner to the complainant and recording the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the accused is acquitted. The conviction and sentence is set aside. _______________________ Justice RAJA ELANGO Dated 14-6-2010 Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1810 OF 2003 Dated 14-6-2010