Y. Rama Krishna v. The State of Telangana
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of'
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of' Pending miscellaneous applications, ifany, shall stand closed' To, //TRUE COPY// SD/- N.SRIHARI EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER
Judgment
Cause title
the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to modify the impugned order dated 24.03.2026 passed in Crl.M.P.No 64 of 2025 which is reiterated again in Crl. M.P. 175 of 2026 in Crl. MP. No. 64 of 2025 in Crl. Appeal No. 144 of 2025 on the File of Learned V. Addl. Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, by reducing the conditional order of 20o/o deposit, in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the conditional order of 20 % deposit passed in the Crl.M.P. No. 175 of 2026 in Crl.MP. No. 64 of 2025 in Crl. Appeal No. 14412025, dated 24.03.2026, on the Fire of Learned v. Addr. sessions Judge, Hyderabad, whire permifting the reca, warrant petition on other crnditions and consequenfly the petitioner may be permitted to surbmit surety and warrant recafied, in the interest of justice and to pass such other on, er or orders as this Hon'bre court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri s.J.A.Nadeem, Advocate for r:he petitioner and sri Jitender Rao Veeramaila, Additionar pubric Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER / IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENTVAS RAO Date: 07.04.2026 Between Y.Rama Krishna The State of Telangana and another AND
ORDER ...
Petitioner Respondents. This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/appellant/ accused questioning the order dated 24.03.2026, passed by the learned V Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in Crl.M.P.No.175 of 2026 in Crl.M.P.No.64 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.I44 of 2025, on the ground that the Sessions Judge imposed an onerous condition.
Heard Mr.S.J.A.Nadeem, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
With the consent of both the learned counsel, the criminal petition is disposed of atttft admission stage. 2
Noticr: in respect of respondent No.2 is dispensed with, on the ground that the petitioner has filed the present criminal petition only challenging the imposition of the condition to deposit 20%o of the compensation amount, and no relief is sought against respondent No.2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned trial Court convicted the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 ofthe Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'NI Act') and sentenced him to undorgo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.44,01,000/-, out of which Rs. I ,000/- shall be paid to the State and Rs.44,00,000/- be paid to the complainant as compensation, in default of v,,hich, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, who, while suspending the sentence imposed by the triat Court, imposed a condition directing the petitioner to deposit 20%o of the compensation amount within 60 days from the date of receipt ofthe order.
Learned Additional Public prosecutor submitted that, in similar circumstan,;es, this Court by placing reliance upon the principle laid 3 down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Saniabij Tari u Kishore S. Borcay', has reduced the compensation arnount ftom20Yo to l0%'
Taking into consideration the submissions made by the respective parties and the principle laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sanjabij Tari (supra), the impugned order 24.03-2026, passed by the leamed V Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in Crl'M'P'No'175 of 2026 in Cr1.M.P.No.64 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.l44 of 2025, is modified, ,directing the petitioner to deposit 10% of the compensation amount within a period of four (04) weeks from today. In default of depositing the said amount within the stipulated period, the leamed Sessions Judge is entitled to proceed with the matter in accordance with law'
Operative part
Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of' Pending miscellaneous applications, ifany, shall stand closed' To, //TRUE COPY// SD/- N.SRIHARI EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER
The V. Addl. Sessions Judge, Hyderabad 2. One CC to Sri S.J.A.Nadeem, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]
4. Two CD Copies BA/PSL #l) I 2025 SCC Online SC 2069 HIGH COIJRT DATED: 07104t202G t*:'\'\ S .J 51 IP R ?tl26 * *r ORDER CRLP.No.5064 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION @$,,
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of'
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — s. 138.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Telangana High Court, on 07 Apr 2026. The bench was SREENIVAS RAO, SREENTVAS RAO.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.