Chada Srinivasa Reddy, v. The State Of A.P.,

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL REVISION CASE Nos.

1178, 1179, 1180 and 1181 of 2007 JUDGMENT :

Learned counsel for 2nd respondent is present. However, inspite of repeated calls, none appears on behalf of the revision petitioner. Hence, this Court is constrained to dispose of these revision cases basing on the material available on record.

2.

Revision petitioner herein is the accused in C.C.Nos.614, 615 and 616 of 2003 and in C.C.No.95 of 2004 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Godavarikhani. He was convicted by the trial Court by judgment dated 24.07.2006 for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- each in C.C.Nos.614, 615 and 616 of 2003 and to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.2,00,000/- in C.C.No.95 of 2004.

3.

The appeals preferred by the revision petitioner before the Court of I Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar vide Criminal Appeal Nos.114 to 117 of 2006 are dismissed confirming the conviction and sentences imposed by the trial Court. Hence, these revisions.

GSD, J Crl.RC.Nos.1178, 1179, 1180 & 1181 of 2007 4.

In these revisions, it is the case of the revision petitioner that the Courts below did not examine the evidence in proper perspective and also did not take into consideration the evidence favourable to him.

5.

The trial Court, on examining the oral and documentary evidence on record, found that the complainant has established the case against the accused. The trial Court did not believe the version of the accused that his signature was obtained on blank cheques, and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as mentioned above. The lower appellate Court, on examining the material on record, confirmed the judgment of the trial Court.

6.

On a perusal of the material on record, the judgments of the trial Court as well as the lower appellate Courts, I am of the considered view that there are no valid grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Courts below. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the orders passed, warranting interference by this Court. 7.

All these revision cases are devoid of merit and are accordingly dismissed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI Date: 07.12.2021 ajr