THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1524 OF 2001 ORDER: 1 The petitioner herein was tried by the learned Special Mobile Judicial Magistrate of I Class, R.R. District in C.C.No.179 of 1999 for the alleged offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court having examined the complainant as P.W.1 and marked Ex.P.1 to P.6 on behalf of the complainant and D.W.1 and Exs.D.1 to D.5 on behalf of the petitioner, found the petitioner guilty of the said offence and accordingly sentenced him to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Further, the petitioner is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.44,000/- being half of the cheque amount to the complainant under section 357 (3) of Cr.P.C within a period of three months from the date of judgment i.e. 27.01.2000. The same was questioned by the petitioner before the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, R.R. District by way of Criminal Appeal No.42 of 2000. The learned Additional District Judge, while confirming the said conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court, dismissed the appeal. Hence the present revision. 2 This court admitted this revision on 31.12.2001. Brief facts are that the petitioner purchased boiler chicken worth of Rs.88,000/- on 20.09.1996 from the complainant and issued a cheque bearing No.483519 for Rs.88,000/- o 04.12.1996 drawn on Andhra Bank, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. The complainant presented the said cheque for clearance but it was dishonoured on 13.12.1996 due to the reason ‘stop payment by the drawer’. The same was intimated to the complainant by its banker on 20.12.1996. Thereafter the complainant got issued a statutory legal notice calling upon the petitioner to pay the amount covered under the cheque. The petitioner having received the said notice, failed to pay the amount even after expiry of 15 days. Hence the present complaint. As stated supra, the trial court after analyzing the entire evidence available on record found the petitioner guilty of the said offence and imposed the punishment accordingly. The petitioner questioned the said judgment dated 27.01.2000 passed by the trial court before the appellate court by way of Criminal Appeal No.42 of 2000, which was dismissed. 3 Having gone through the evidence on record and the judgments of both the courts below and having heard the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners this court is of the view that the said sentence imposed by the courts below is perfectly justified. I see no irregularity or illegality in the judgments impugned in this revision and no interference is called for. 4 Accordingly, I see no merits in this revision and thus the same is dismissed. -------------- Kvsn 08.07.2010