THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1084 of 2004 ORDER: 1 The petitioner herein was tried as accused in C.C.No.389 of 2000 for the offence punishable under section 138 r/w section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the learned IV Additional Munsif Magistrate, Guntur District. 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 four months and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/, in default of payment of fine he shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. As against the said judgment dated 25.10.2002, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.448 of 2002 and the learned V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Guntur, by his judgment dated 01.07.2004 while concurring with the said finding given by the learned Magistrate, dismissed the said appeal. Questioning the same the accused before the trial court preferred this revision. 2 Brief facts that led to the filing of the present revision are that on 11.12.1999 the petitioner borrowed an amount of Rs.85,000/- from the complainant and later he made part payment of Rs.25,000/-. In discharge of the remaining debt, he issued three cheques for Rs.10,000/-, Rs.20,000/- and Rs.30,000/-. The complainant presented the said cheques into the bank for clearance, but, however, the same were bounced with an endorsement ‘insufficient funds’. Thereafter the complainant got issued legal notice to the petitioner demanding him for payment of the amounts covered under the said cheques, but as there was no response from the petitioner, after following the procedure laid down under the law, the complainant filed the complaint. 3 Heard both sides. 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 01.07.2004 and the petitioner was taken into custody immediately. It is only after the revision was admitted and bail was granted by this court on 05.07.2004, the petitioner came out from the jail. So 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 1999, and as the petitioner was in jail for a period of five days, this court takes a lenient view and reducing the said sentence of simple imprisonment of four months, as imposed by the courts blow, to that of the period, which the petitioner had already undergone. 6 Excepting the above modification, this revision in all other aspects is dismissed. -------------- 03.02.2011 Kvsn