THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1545 OF 2003 ORDER: 1 This revision is directed against the judgment passed by the learned V Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTC), Guntur in Crl.A.No.622 of 1999 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner by the learned IV Additional Munsif Magistrate, Guntur in C.C.No.215 of 1997 dated 16.12.1999 for the offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. 2 Facts in brief are that during the course of business transactions A.2 purchased stocks on behalf of the A.1 from the complainant and fell due a sum of Rs.91,859-22 by 18.3.1997. The second accused in order to discharge the said debt issued three cheques for Rs.15,000/-, Rs.20,000/- and 20,000/- respectively, which were drawn on Andhra Bank, Butchireddypalem branch, Nellore District. The complainant presented the said cheques before his banker Canara Bank, Guntur for collection but the said cheques were returned with an endorsement “Funds Insufficient” Hence the complainant, after issuing statutory notice, filed the present complaint. 3 The trial court having analysed the oral evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and the documentary evidence i.e. Exs.P.1 to 20 marked on behalf of the complainant, found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months. As against the said judgment dated 16.12.1999 passed by the trial court, the accused preferred Criminal Appeal No. 622 of 1999 and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, as stated supra, dismissed the said appeal. Hence the present revision. 4 Heard. 5 The appeal was dismissed on 13.10.2003 and this court granted bail on 17.10.2003. Thus the accused was in jail for a period of six days. 6 In view of the fact that the said offence is of the year 1997 and as the accused was made roaming form one court to another for all these years, this court is of the view that trauma which the accused has suffered all these years itself is a sufficient punishment for the offence committed by him. 7 Hence, in order to meet the ends of justice, this court, without going into the merits of the case, holds that the said sentence of six months simple imprisonment can be reduced to that of the period, which the petitioner had already undergone. 8 Excepting the above modification, this revision, in all other aspects, is dismissed. -------------- Kvsn 15.07.2010