THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1594 OF 2002 ORDER: 1 Aggrieved by the judgment dated 09.08.2002 passed in Criminal Appeal No.309 of 2001 by the learned VII Additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the first respondent herein of the offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, the de facto complainant before the trial court filed this revision. 2 Brief facts are that the complainant is carrying on a business in oils and the first respondent purchased oil from the firm under credit bills from 09.04.1999 to 08.07.1999 and fell due a sum of Rs.2,69,100/-. In discharge of the said debt, the first respondent issued a cheque dated 26.04.1999 for Rs.89,100/- towards part payment in favour of the complainant. The complainant presented the said cheque but the same was dishonoured with an endorsement “exceeds arrangement”. Thereafter, the complainant, after following due procedure as provided under the law, filed the present complaint against the first respondent before the trial court. The trial court having analysed the entire material available before it, found the first respondent guilty of the said offence and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and it further directed the first respondent to pay Rs.90,000/- to the complainant towards compensation as provided for under section 357(3) Cr.P.C. Aggrieved thereby the first respondent preferred Criminal Appeal No.309 of 2001 and the learned VII Additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada vide his judgment dated 09.08.2001 allowed the said appeal and set aside the conviction a sentence imposed by the trial court. Questioning the said judgment, passed by the appellate court, the complainant preferred this revision. 3 Having regard to the fact that the petitioner instead of approaching this court invoking the jurisdiction of this court under sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., should have preferred an appeal as provided under section 378(4) of Cr.P.C this revision is not maintainable since against an order of acquittal an appeal lies but not a revision. 4 Accordingly this revision is dismissed. --------------- Kvsn 15.07.2010