THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.859 of 2004 ORDER: 1 First Respondent herein filed a private complaint against the petitioner for the offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and the same was taken on file as C.C.No.580 of 2000 by the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Khammam. During the course of trial, the first respondent got examined four witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 4 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.13 and Exs.C.1 to C.15 were also marked by the court. On behalf of the petitioner D.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.D.1 to D.5 were marked. The learned Magistrate having gone through the entire evidence came to the conclusion that the petitioner is guilty of the said offence and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months and also to pay an amount of Rs.4 Lakhs, which is the cheque amount, to the first respondent towards compensation as provided for under section 357 (3) of Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by the said judgment dated 29.04.2003 the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.78 of 2003 and the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC), at Khammam, while confirming with the findings given by the trial court, dismissed the said appeal by his judgment dated 07.05.2004. Hence the present revision. 2 This revision was admitted on 11.05.2004 and the petitioner was granted bail. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, the counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner did not comply with the said order of the courts below and he has not deposited the fine amount of Rs.4 lakhs, which was awarded towards compensation. 3 In the light of the said submission made by the learned counsel for the first respondent this court looked into the order dated 11.05.2004 and the same reads as under: “The execution of the sentence imposed against the petitioners is suspended and the petitioners are enlarged on bail on each one of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of I-Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Khammam.” 4 From the above, it is clear that execution of sentence alone is suspended and in so far as the compensation amount is concerned, this court did not interfere with the findings of the courts below. In those circumstances, a duty is cast upon the petitioner to deposit the said fine amount of Rs.4 lakhs and as he failed to do so, this court is of the view that this revision cannot be entertained. 5 Accordingly this revision is dismissed. -------------- 03.02.2011 Kvsn