IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.9263 OF 2009 Between: Motepali Veeranjaneyulu, S/o. Seshagiri Rao ……Petitioner - accused AND The State of A.P. Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad & another .....Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.9263 OF 2009 ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioner Motepalli Veeranjaneyulu, accused, seeking to quash the judgment dated 08-10-2009 in C.C. No.258 of 2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Gudivada, Krishna District, whereby the learned Magistrate convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month and also to pay a compensation of Rs.3,031/-, which is equivalent to the impugned cheque, to the complainant, respondent No.2 herein. 2. Heard. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has not pleaded guilty, but the trial Court erroneously recorded that he has pleaded guilty and accordingly sentenced him. 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is absolutely incorrect as at page No.2 of the judgment in the last paragraph, it is recorded that the petitioner was questioned with regard to quantum of sentence in the presence of his counsel and he did not say anything. If really, the plea of the petitioner was wrongly recorded when he was questioned about the quantum of sentence that too in the presence of his counsel, if not the accused, at least his counsel would have brought to the notice of the trial Court that the petitioner did not plead guilty. Such being the case, it is not at all a fit case for granting any relief. 5. It is unfortunate that written submission is made that though the petitioner has not pleaded guilty, the trial Court wrongly recorded that he has pleaded guilty. 6. However, considering the fact that the amount involved is only Rs.3,000/-, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) sustaining the order of compensation as ordered by the trial Court. As false statement is made, petitioner has to deposit an amount of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the District Legal Services Authority along with the fine. 7. With the above modification in sentence, the Criminal Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission itself. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J November 6, 2009. PV