HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL. REVISION CASE No. 826 OF 2004 Wednesday, the Fourth Day of July, Two Thousand and Ten Between Nadendla Prabhakar Rao Petitioner AND Bombay Mercantile Co-Op. Bank Ltd., (Scheduled Bank), Hyderabad Branch, Hussaini Building Complex, MJ Market, Hyderabad and another Respondents ORAL ORDER: The III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, tried the petitioner herein for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in C.C. No. 521 of 1999. During the course of trial, PW-1 was examined on behalf of the respondent bank and Exs. P-1 to P-14 were marked. The petitioner has not chosen to examine anybody and also did not choose to file any document. Having analysed the oral and documentary evidence, the learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, came to the conclusion that the petitioner is guilty of the offence and by his judgment 25.6.2003 convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default of payment thereof, to further suffer simple imprisonment for one month. The petitioner herein questioned the same by filing Criminal Appeal No. 296 of 2003 and the learned III Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, while concurring with the findings recorded by the trial court, by his judgment dated 22.4.2004, dismissed the appeal. Hence, this Revision Case. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the petitioner herein who is owner of M/s. Trident Engineering Works, has availed a term loan of Rs.8.00 lakhs from the respondent bank with a overdraft facility of Rs.1.00 lakh for his business needs. On demand from the respondent bank to clear off the dues, the petitioner issued two cheques dated 25.7.1999 and 30.9.1999 for Rs.1,50,000/- and Rs.1.00 lakh respectively, which on presentation, were returned as the petitioner had closed the account. Since the petitioner having received the demand notice dated 5.11.1999 issued by the respondent bank, had failed to pay the amount due under the two cheques, the complaint under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. From the record it is clear that the appeal was dismissed on 22.4.2004 and the petitioner was taken into custody immediately and thereafter he came out of the jail by virtue of the bail granted by this court on 30.4.2004. Thus it is clear that he was in jail for about ten days. As the alleged offence had taken place in the year 1999 and as the petitioner was in jail for about ten days, this court intends to take a lenient view. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment of one year is reduced to that of the period already undergone. With this modification in the sentence of imprisonment, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed confirming the impugned judgment in all other aspects. _____________________________ Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada August 4, 2010 MAS