HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C.No.725 of 2003 AND CRL.RC.M.P.No.745 of 2010 JUDGMENT: This criminal revision case is directed against the judgment of the learned VI-Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.) Guntur, in Crl.A.No.378 of 2000, dated 04.06.2003 confirming the conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 8 (b) (ii) of the A.P. Prohibition Act imposed against the revision petitioner-accused by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Prohibition and Excise), Guntur in C.C.No.439 of 1997 dated 24.07.2000. The prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P7 and M.O.1 to prove the guilt of the accused. On a perusal of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, the trial Court found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 8 (b) (ii) of the A.P. Prohibition Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as stated supra. In an appeal preferred by the revision petitioner-accused against the said conviction and sentence, the learned VI-Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Guntur, confirmed the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioner-accused preferred this criminal revision. Heard both sides. During the pendency of this revision, this Court by order dated 04.04.2007 referred this matter to the Lok Adalat, as the offence alleged is compoundable and accordingly the petitioner and the respondent appeared before the Lok Adalat. The Lok Adalat by its order dated 18.12.2007 passed the following order: “The petitioner-accused and the concerned Excise officials are present. It is submitted that the petitioner counsel submitted the representation to the concerned Excise Superintendent for compounding of offence long back, but so far no orders are passed. The concerned Excise officials could not say anything about that representation and now the petitioner-accused submitted the representation for compounding the offence. Hence the same is handover to Sri Siva Kumar, Inspector, Guntur-II to submit the same before the concerned Superintendent for passing the appropriate order. The petitioner-accused is directed to pay the compounding fee and produce the receipt before the Lok Adalat on next date of adjournment. The concerned Excise Superintendent also directed to inform the result of the representation given by the petitioner-accused within 30 days from today.” On the last occasion, when this matter came up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that by virtue of the order of the Lok Adalat, the petitioner paid an amount of Rs.250/- towards compounding fee on 29.07.2008, but, however, in view of non-submission of the report by the Excise officials to the Lok Adalat, the matter was remitted back to this Court for hearing. In view of said submission, this Court directed the learned Additional to get instructions in the matter. When this matter came up for hearing today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the matter was compounded since the petitioner-accused has paid an amount of Rs.250/- towards compounding fee. Since the offence alleged against the petitioner-accused has been compounded, this Court is of the view that the conviction and sentence passed against the petitioner-accused by the Courts below for the offence punishable under Section 8 (b) (ii) of the A.P. Prohibition Act are set aside and he is acquitted of the said charge and he shall be set at liberty forthwith if he is not required in any other case. Fine amount, if any paid, by the petitioner-accused shall be refunded to him. Accordingly, CRL.R.C. and CRL.RC.MP are allowed. _______________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 09.06.2010 Gsn.