THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2052 of 2004 ORDER: 1 The petitioner herein was tried as accused in C.C.No.163 of 2002 for the offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act by the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Excise Court, Guntur. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P11. The learned Magistrate having assessed the entire evidence both oral and documentary found the petitioner guilty of the said offence and accordingly sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months and also to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of fine he shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months. As against the said judgment dated 25.11.2002, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.523 of 2002 and the learned VII Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, by his judgment dated 10.12.2004 while concurring with the findingis of the trial court, dismissed the said appeal. Questioning the same the accused before the trial court preferred this revision. 2 The facts in brief are that on 10.01.2001 the petitioner purchased timber worth Rs.3,08,000/- from the complainant on credit basis and in discharge of part payment of the same, the petitioner issued Ex.P.3 cheque dated 10.062.001for Rs.50,000/-and Ex.P.4 cheque dated 10.08.2001 for Rs.50,000/- drawn on Corporation Bank, Guntur. When the complainant presented the said two cheques, the same were dishonoured with an endorsement ‘funds insufficient’. Thereafter, the complainant got issued a legal notice dated 15.2.2001 and as there was no response from the petitioner, the complainant presented the said complaint before the trial court. 3 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent is no more. 4 The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is not a fit case for interference, but, however, he requested the court to take a lenient view in so far as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned. 5 Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner this court looked into the record. The appellate court dismissed the appeal on 10.12.2004 and the petitioner was taken into custody immediately. It is only after the revision was admitted and bail was granted by this court on 14.12.2004, the petitioner came out of the jail. From the above, the petitioner was in jail for a period of 5 days. In that view of the matter, since the offence for which the petitioner was convicted and sentenced relates to the year 2002, and as the petitioner was in jail for a period of 5 days, this court takes a lenient view and reducing the said sentences of imprisonment imposed by the appellate court to that of the period, which the petitioner had already undergone. 6 Excepting the above modification, this revision in all other aspects is dismissed. -------------- 28.01.2011 Kvsn