D. LAKSHMI Vs. Y.V. SARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision case is directed against the order, dated 22.12.2012 passed in Criminal MP No.753 of 2012 in Criminal Appeal No.59 of 2011 on the file of II - Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, whereby and whereunder, the learned Additional Sessions Judge directed the parties to follow the guidelines of the Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H.(2010) 5 SCC 663., to compound the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, (for short,'the N.I. Act'); Facts, in brief, are:

(2.) THE petitioner is the accused and the respondent is the complainant in CC No.241 of 2007 on the file of Ill -Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, L.B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. The accused has been prosecuted for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act on the complaint filed on 2.4.2007. The learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, L.B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, on full - fledged trial, found the petitioner/accused guilty for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to suffer SI for one year and pay a fine of Rs.5,000 in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period three months, by judgment, dated 29.3.2011. The petitioner/accused assailed the judgment of conviction and sentence passed in CC No.241 of 2007 by filing Criminal Appeal No.59 of 2011 on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad. Pending the appeal, the petitioner/accused and the respondent/complainant settled their disputes. Thereupon, the petitioner/accused and the respondent/complainant moved Criminal MP No.753 of 2012 under Section 147 of the N.I. Act to record compromise and set aside the conviction passed in CC No.241 of 2007, dated 29.3.2011. The learned Additional Sessions Judge directed the parties to follow the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu's case (supra), in compounding the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, by an order, dated 22.12.2012. Hence this criminal revision case by the accused.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused that the guidelines as to payment of certain percentage of amount to the Legal Services Authority in the event of the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act is compounded, cannot be made applicable to the present case since the complaint came to be instituted much prior to the issuance of the guidelines. In support of his contentions, reliance has been placed on the judgment of Jharkhand High Court in Krishna Prasad v. State of Jharkhand 2012(1) Crimes 110(Jhar.) wherein it has been held as hereunder: