APHC010236712020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE 20th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO I.A.No.1 of 2022 In&And CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 343/2020 Between: 1. PILLA. PRABHAKARA RAO,, S/O LATE NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O PARK CENTRE, NIDANAMDODDI, GAVARAPALCM, ANAKAPALLI, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. A UMAINAHESWARA RAO, S/O LATE NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, D-NO 18-35, SEETHAMMADHARA NORTH EXTENSION, VISAKHAPATNAM CITY 2. THE STATE OF A P, REP THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P AT AMARAVATHI. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. TATA SINGAIAH GOUD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. LAKSHMANA RAO PAMARTHI 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.R.C.No.343 of 2020 Dated 20.08.2026 The Court made the following: ORDER: Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 2. I.A.No.1 of 2022 is filed to permit the Petitioner and Respondent No.1 to compound the offence. 3. The village elders and well-wishers intervened in the matter and, with a view to maintaining peace and harmony between both parties, facilitated an amicable settlement. Pursuant to the said intervention and settlement, the Petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) to the Complainant towards full and final settlement of the claim arising out of the present case, to the full and final satisfaction of the Complainant. A joint memo has been filed by the Petitioner and Respondent No.1 seeking to record the compounding the offence between the parties. 4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner, aged about 66 years, is a small peasant and is unable to bear the costs as directed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H1 observed that for compounding an offence under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Revisional Court, i.e., the High Court, the Petitioner is required to pay a certain amount towards costs. However, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority v. 1 (2010) 5 SCC 663 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.R.C.No.343 of 2020 Dated 20.08.2026 Prateek Jain2 relaxed the rigor of the judgment in Damodar S. Prabhu supra and observed that in appropriate cases, matters can be compounded at the revision stage either on payment of minimal costs or by waiving the costs in suitable cases. 5. Considering the financial conditions of the Petitioner, the payment of costs is waived. 6. In view of the compromise affected in between the Petitioner and the Respondent No.1, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of as compromised. Resultantly, the Petitioner is acquitted under Section 320(8) of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ by giving permission to the Petitioner to compromise the offence with the Respondent No.1 under Section 147 of ‘the N.I.Act.,’ read with 320 (6) of the ‘Cr.P.C’. 7. Accordingly, the I.A.No.1 of 2022 is allowed, and the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of as compromised by compounding the offence. Consequently, the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Magistrate-IV, Visakhapatnam, in C.C.No.175 of 2017, dated 30.11.2017, as confirmed by the learned I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, in Criminal Appeal No.651 of 2017, dated 30.10.2019, are hereby set aside, as a result, the Petitioner is acquitted. There shall be no order as to costs. 2 (2014) 10 SCC 690 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.R.C.No.343 of 2020 Dated 20.08.2026 As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dt:20.08.2026 KMS 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.R.C.No.343 of 2020 Dated 20.08.2026 129 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 343/2020 Date: 20.08.2026 KMS