HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL. REVISION CASE No. 1765 OF 2002 Thursday, the Fifth Day of August, Two Thousand and Ten Between Angati Demudu Petitioner AND Pasupulati Ananda Kumar Respondents ORAL ORDER: The complainant approached this court and field this Revision stating that the sentence awarded by the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam in CC No.229 of 2000 dated 20.9.2000 against the first respondent herein for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is inadequate. According to him, the respondent herein has borrowed an amount of Rs.2.00 lakhs and in discharge of the same, he has issued a cheque bearing No.774641 dated 10.2.2000 drawn on Corporation Bank, Visakhapatnam, for a sum of Rs.2.00 lakhs, which, on presentation, was bounced due to insufficiency of funds. The complainant, after following the procedure, filed complaint under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the said offence and numbered the same as CC No. 229 of 2000. During the course of trial, the complainant himself was examined as PW-1 apart from examining two other witnesses as PWs 2 and 3 and Exs. P-1 to P-7 were marked. On behalf of the accused/ respondent, he himself was examined as DW-1 and Exs. D-1 to D-4 were marked. Having analysed the said offence, the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is proved beyond reasonable doubt and, accordingly, sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default of payment thereof, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months. As hereinbefore stated, questioning the inadequacy of the sentence, the complainant has approached this court by filing the instant Revision. Heard Mr. T.Pradyumna Kumar Reddy learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Anjanadevi Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the first respondent. From the records it is clear that after filing of the said complaint, a sum of Rs.2.00 lakhs had been paid by the first respondent and the same is established by Exs. D-1 and D-2. Of course, the payments under Exs. D-1 and D-2 had been made only after filing of the complaint under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and, as such, the respondent cannot claim immunity from the guilt. But, however, in view of the subsequent amendment, which has come into force in the year 2007, whereby the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is made compoundable and as the entire cheque amount of Rs.2.00 lakhs had been made, this court is of the view that no interference in the order impugned, is called for. Accordingly, I see no merits in the Revision Case and the same is dismissed. _____________________________ Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada August 5, 2010 MAS