THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY Crl.Rc.No.1145 of 2004 JUDGMENT: 1. This revision is filed under Section 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. against judgment made in Crl.A.No.75 of 1996 dated 13.5.1997 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Guntur allowing the appeal and setting aside conviction and sentence imposed in C.C.No.42 of 1994 dated 19.2.1996 on the file of II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Bapatla, Guntur district. The prosecution case is as follows: 2. The complainant Sri Venkata Raghavendra Rice and Oil Mill filed complaint under Section 190 Cr.P.C. in which it is pleaded and alleged that it is a registered firm having its Mill at Karlapalem and the accused is a businessman and he purchased from him ground nut seed under three credit bills and issued three cheques towards consideration, but the same when presented before proper form, were returned with endorsement ‘insufficient funds’. 3. The accused was tried under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the trial Court. The plea of the accused is that he is not guilty of the allegations made. 4. In support of his case, the complainant got examined himself as P.W.1 and also got examined P.W.2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P31 and in support of her case, the accused got marked Exs.D1 to D13 and on consideration of the entire material on record, the trial Court found the accused guilty of committing the offence punishable under Section 138 N.I. Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of the same, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months and being aggrieved by that, the accused preferred Crl.A.No.75 of 1996 before the Sessions Judge, Guntur which was allowed setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court and aggrieved by it, the complainant preferred this revision. 5. It is the contention of learned counsel for the revision petitioner- complainant that sufficient evidence was placed with regards to the debt and also dishonouring of the cheque, but just on the ground that the Accused in her reply notice alleged that there was breach of conditions on the part of the complainant (seller of the goods) and both the sides filed suits which were pending, the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court were set aside without any basis and hence the judgment of the appellate Court is liable to be set aside. 6. Now the point for consideration is whether there are sufficient grounds in order to set aside the judgment of the appellate Court. 7. I have gone through the record. Evidence was recorded with regards to the debt and issuance of cheque and also dishonouring of the same and there is no record to show that the seller of the goods (complainant) committed breach of relevant conditions and both the parties filed civil suits. Further, simply because civil suits were filed by them, it does not mean that the criminal liability of the accused if any seized. Both i.e. the civil suit and criminal case are to be tried and disposed of independently as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in KISHAN SINGH v. GURPAL SINGH[1]. The appellate Court should have insisted upon the accused to produce some record in support of claim, therefore the matter is remanded to the appellate Court for proper disposal taking into consideration the relevant circumstances and also taking necessary measures as required. The revision is accordingly disposed of. _________________________ G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Date: 27.6.2011 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY Crl.Rc.No.1145 of 2004 27.6.2011 [1] AIR 2010 SC 3624