HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.948 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: On the basis of a private complaint filed by the second respondent herein, the petitioner was tried by the V Additional Munsif Magistrate, Guntur, in C.C.No.31 of 2004 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. During the course of trial, the complainant got himself examined as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-5. On behalf of the accused, neither oral nor documentary evidence was let in. The learned Magistrate having analysed the entire evidence on record, found the accused guilty of the said offence and accordingly, by her judgment, dated 08.01.2007, sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. The same was questioned by the accused by filing Criminal Appeal No.27 of 2007 on the file of the IX Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Guntur, who by her judgment, dated 07.11.2008, while concurring with the findings recorded by the trial Court, dismissed the appeal, thereby confirming the judgment rendered by the trial Court. Hence, the present Criminal Revision Case. The succinct facts of the case are that the petitioner borrowed an amount of Rs.30,000/- from the complainant on 21.06.2001 agreeing to repay the same with interest. Towards the discharge of the said debt, the accused issued a cheque on 09.07.2003 to the complainant and when the same was presented for collection in the bank, it was returned with endorsement “funds insufficient”. Subsequently, after issuance of the notice, as the petitioner failed to repay the said amount nor give any reply, the second respondent herein filed the said private complaint. Today, when the matter is taken, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused submitted that the petitioner-accused paid the said debt due to the second respondent herein and further, requested this Court to take a lenient view having regard to the fact that the petitioner is in jail since 01.01.2011. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and on perusal of the record, it is clear that the accused has been lodged in jail since 01.01.2011 i.e., he has undergone sentence of about two months as against the sentence of four months of imprisonment imposed on him by both the Courts below and hence, this Court is of the view that a lenient view can be taken. Accordingly, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of four months for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments 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. As the petitioner is in jail, the Office is hereby directed to send a copy of this order to the jail authorities and the jail authorities shall release the petitioner forthwith, if he is not required in connection with any other crime. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 22nd March 2011 DR