APHC010408832019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1267 OF 2019 Between: 1. DANDAMRAJU VENKATAPAHNI KRISHNA @ DANDAMRAJU VENKATA SIVA KRISHNA, S/o V L Narasimha Prasada Rao, Hindu,, aged about 38 years, Occ Business, D no 1-2-170, Kothapeta, Hyderabad 500035 ...Petitioner AND 1. K N V SATYANARAYANA, S/o Satyanarayana Hindu, aged about 39 yrs, R/o Duvva, Tanuku Mandal, West Godavari District. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: S SYAMSUNDER RAO Counsel for the Respondents: SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondents:PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following order: ORDER: The Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity, ‘the Cr.P.C’)/Section 438 and 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’), seeking to set aside the Judgment and order dated 05.11.2019 of the Hon’ble IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tanuku, West Godavari District in Crl.A.No.489 of 2017 partly allowed the order dated 06.12.2017 in C.C.No.642 of 2011 on the file of the Hon’ble II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku, West Godavari District. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. Petitioner/Accused No.3 is present. Respondent No.1 is not present. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that the mother of the respondent No.1 expired yesterday. 4. The criminal revision case has been filed challenging Judgment and order dated 05.11.2019 of the Hon’ble IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tanuku, West Godavari District in Crl.A.No.489 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the Appellate Court imposed a fine of 1,00,000/- as compensation in default shall suffer simple imprisonment of two months. 5. It is pertinent to mention the interesting observations of the learned Appellate Court which are held as under: “As per the recitals of complaint, A1 is the Padmalaya enterprises firm, A2 is the managing partner and A3 is the partner. The Jayasri Guruchanram marketing Associates is the sister concerned of A1 firm. Complainant is the sole proprietary concerned of Sri Lakshmi enteriprises. Complainant entered into a business deal with the sister concerned of A1 firm, whose business activities were conducted by A1 to A3. Complainant paid the amounts in the said business transaction and taken the stock of anti radiation mobile chips. But the complainant intend to cancel the deal and had return the stock, towards payment accused A1 to A3 has issued Ex.P1 and P5 filled up post dated cheques.” 6. The cheque was issued by Accused No.2 on behalf of Accused No.1. Accused No.1 is the firm by name M/s. Padmalaya Enterprises. Accused No.3 has not signed the cheque. He is not the signatory to the cheque. Accused Nos.1 and 2 preferred a Criminal Appeal, which was numbered as C.A. No.485 of 2017, and the same was settled before the Lok Adalat. 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 06.08.2026 JLSR 93 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1267/2019 Date: 06.08.2026 JLSR