THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1823 of 2004 ORDER:- The petitioner herein was tried by the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Hyderabad East and North, Ranga Reddy District in C.C.No.107 of 2000 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. During the course of trial, the complainant i.e., the first respondent herein was examined as P.W.1 and one T.Veerabhadra Rao was examined as P.W.2 and Exs.P1 to P.9 were marked on his behalf. On a overall assessment of the said documentary evidence, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the petitioner/accused is guilty of the said offence and accordingly, sentenced him to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of six months and also sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The said judgment was questioned by filing Criminal Appeal No.2 of 2004 and the learned V Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, by his judgment dated 19th October, 2004, while concurring with the said findings of the trial Court dismissed the appeal. This revision is filed questioning the said judgment dated 19.10.2004. This Court while admitting the revision on 25.10.2004 granted temporary bail to the petitioner/accused for a period of two months and subsequently, the same was extended until further orders. When this matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that it is not a case for interference on merits, but, however, requested this Court to take a lenient view having regard to the fact that the petitioner was in jail for about a week. Having regard to the said fact, this Court looked into the record. As the cheque amount is Rs.43,900/- and the alleged offence is of the year 1999 and the petitioner was in jail from 19.10.2004 to 26.10.2004 i.e,. for about a week, this Court is of the view that a lenient view can be taken. Accordingly, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of six months for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act imposed on the petitioner-accused by both the Courts below is reduced to that of the period already undergone by him, while maintaining the sentence of fine. Except the said modification in the sentence of imprisonment, in all other aspects, this Criminal Revision Case stands dismissed. ______________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 24th February 2011 bud THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE (SR) NO. 30313 of 2010 DATED: 09.09.2010