APHC010274132011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3560] TUESDAY, THE 11th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA I.A. No.1 OF 2026 IN/AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 320/2011 Between: 1. SHAIK MAHABOOB, HYD., S/O. ABDUL RAHMAN O.B. OPERATOR, BSNL, O/O. DEP (EXTNL.EGD), ERRAGADDA, HYDERABAD-18. ...PETITIONER AND 1. KOLLAM SION ANO, S/O. KOLLAM NAGANNA R/O. EAST GONAGUDEM, RAJANAGARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the CriminalRevisionCase, the High Court may be pleased toto set aside the order and conviction in Crl.A.No.73 of 2009 dated 11.02.2011 on the file of Family Court-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry in confirming the order and conviction dated 22.04.2009 in CCNo.509 of 2004 on the file of III addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Rajahmundry IA NO: 1 OF 2011(CRLRCMP 482 OF 2011 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of sentence recorded in Crl.A.No.73 of 2009 dated 11.02.2011 on the file of Family Court-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry in confirming the order and conviction -2- CRL.R.C. No.320 OF 2011 dated 22.04.2009 in CCNo.509 of 2004 on the file of III Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Rajahmundry and enlarge the petitioner on bail IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to record the compromise by allowing the present Criminal revision i.e. CRL.RC.NO.320 Of 2011 by setting aside the judgment dated 21- 03-2017 in Criminal Appeal No. 73/2009 on the file of Family Court-cum- Additional District Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry in confirming the order and conviction dated 22.04.2009 in CC.No. 509 of 2004 on the file of III Addl Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Rajahmundry and/or pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MOCHERLA DEEPAK BHARGAVARAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. - 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3. M SRI ATCHYUT The Court made the following common order: 1. The instant criminal revision case, under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed against the judgment dated 11.02.2011, passed by the Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry, in Crl.A.No.73 of 2009, whereby learned Sessions Judge confirmed the judgment dt.22.04.2009 passed by the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rajahmundry, in C.C. No.509 of 2004 for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, whereby the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. -3- CRL.R.C. No.320 OF 2011 2. Pending the instant criminal revision case, the petitioner and the 1st respondent have settled the dispute amicably outside the Court. In terms of the said settlement, I.A. No.1 of 2026 has been filed to record the compromise entered into between them petitioner and the 1st respondent herein. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the affidavit of the 1st respondent and the joint memo filed by the parties. 4. The petitioner and the 1st respondent are present before this Court. On being questioned, the 1st respondent submits that the dispute between him and the petitioner/accused has been settled amicably and that he has received the entire amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from the petitioner. The 1st respondent has also stated in his affidavit that he has entered into the compromise voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. 5. The petitioner as well as the 1st respondent have also stated that they have filed the joint memo voluntarily and out of their own volition. 6. On the perusal, it appears that the said joint memo has been duly signed by the petitioner as well as the 1st respondent and attested by their respective learned counsel. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I find no illegality in accepting the compromise entered into between the parties. The offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable in nature. Since the parties have amicably settled the dispute, the offence is hereby compounded. -4- CRL.R.C. No.320 OF 2011 7. Accordingly, I.A. No.1 of 2026 is considered and allowed. The offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is permitted to be compounded in terms of compromise. Consequently, the conviction and sentence recorded by learned trial court in C.C.No.509 of 2004 and confirmed by learned appellate Court in Crl.A.No.73 of 2009 against the petitioner is hereby set aside in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties. The petitioner is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 8. The criminal revision case is, accordingly, allowed. 9. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this revision shall stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA Dt.11.08.2026 BV