THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.307 of 2007 DATED: 07-10-2010 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner questioning the judgment, dated 26-02-2007, in Crl.A.No.313 of 2006 passed by the learned III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, confirming the judgment, dated 30-08-2006, in C.C.No.274 of 2002 passed by the learned XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 2. Brief facts of the case are that a private complaint was filed under Section 200 Cr.P.C., by the 2nd respondent herein-complainant against the petitioner herein for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for brevity, ‘the Act’) and the same was numbered as C.C.No.274 of 2002 on the file of the learned XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 3. During the course of trial, P.W.1 was examined and Exs.P1 to P11 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. D.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.D1 to D7 were marked on behalf of the defence. 4. Having analyzed the said evidence, the learned Magistrate found the petitioner herein guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two months. Aggrieved thereby, Crl.A.No.313 of 2006 was filed and the same was dismissed, as stated supra. Hence, the present revision. 5. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 6. It appears, during the pendency of this revision there was a compromise between the parties and the petitioner agreed to pay a total sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards full and final settlement and an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was paid on 04-08-2010 by way of a Pay Order drawn on Syndicate Bank, Somajiguda branch, Hyderabad and a post-dated cheque, bearing No.539095, dated 10-12- 2010, for the balance amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was issued. In the light of the said compromise entered into between the parties, 2nd respondent herein approached this Court and filed a petition stating that he is not interested in getting the matter prosecuted and that the offence be compounded. 7. Today, parties are present and when questioned, 2nd respondent herein-complainant stated that he has no objection if the said offence is compounded and he also admitted the fact that he received the said amount. In view of the same, and as the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act being compoundable, the same is compounded and the entire proceedings in C.C.No.274 of 2002 are hereby set aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the said offence charged. 8. Accordingly, Criminal Revision Case is allowed. _______________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 07th October, 2010. Tsy