1. This Criminal Appeal is filed against the order of acquittal dated 30-09-2010 passed in CC.No.1572 of 2009 by the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, LB Nagar, Ranga Reddy district, by the judgment in CC.No.1572 of 2009, Chilakapati Madhu Babu, an Advocate filed a complaint against the accused, Ghanta Venkateswara Rao, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that a cheque for an amount of Rs.40,000=00 issued in his favour towards the charges of the services rendered by him to the accused/first respondent, who was his client was dishonoured and that the said cheque was issued for discharging legally enforceable debt/liability.

2. The offence was tried by the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at LB Nagar, Ranga Reddy district, during the course of which, PWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exs.P-1 to P-11 were marked on behalf of the prosecution, whereas no oral or documentary evidence was let-in on behalf of the accused and the accused himself did not offer himself to be examined as a witness.

3. Heard Smt. N (P) Anjana Devi Satyanarayana, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-complainant, Sri K. Ramesh Reddy, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1-Accused and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State.

4. The short facts relevant for considering the appeal may be stated as follows :

The respondent No.1 – accused had a dispute with one Mr.V.N. Goud in connection with purchase of certain house plots in Kankadurga Nagar near Hyderabad-Vijayawada Highway. According to the respondent No.1 he having agreed to purchase 56 plots for an amount of Rs.56 lakhs, paid an advance of Rs.15 lakhs but he was unable to pay the remaining balance of sale price and that the respondent No.1 returned the agreement to Mr.V.N. Goud and gave no objection to him in writing to sell plots to the third parties. It is stated that in turn Mr.V.N. Goud agreed to refund Rs.15 lakhs as advance paid by the first respondent. As the amount was not refunded, there was a dispute between the respondent No.1 and Mr.V.N.Goud. The respondent No.1 approached the appellant, who is an advocate for legal advice and the appellant suggested him to file a case alleging commission of offence of cheating and he took an amount of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant for giving the said opinion. At that time the appellant demanded Rs.one lakh from the respondent No.1 as his fee for conducting the entire case including filing of civil suit. Thereafter, the respondent No.1 went away and did not turn up for about one month. On 28-10-2003 the first respondent made a phone call and demanded refund of half of the consultation fees. The appellant refused to return consultation fee on the ground that the respondent No.1 had already taken legal advice from him by discussing hours together, consuming lot of valuable time of the appellant and also that he got drafted the required report to be lodged with police.Subsequently, it is stated that on 16-11-2003 the respondent No.1 approached the appellant and informed that he has proof in the form of receipt in respect of payment of an amount of Rs.5 lakhs to Mr. V.N. Goud and therefore, Mr.V.N. Goud returned him Rs. 5 lakhs in instalments and refused to return back balance amount of Rs.10 lakhs. The appellant asked the respondent No.1 to bring some documentary evidence about the payment of Rs.10 lakhs but the respondent No.1 could not get the evidence of payment of the said amount to Mr.V.N. Goud.

Then it is stated that the appellant asked the accused to pay Rs.one lakh towards his fee to proceed with the case and to create evidence and to make a detailed complaint. When the accused expressed his inability to pay the fees of Rs.one lakh, the appellant suggested to pay by means of cheque along with covering letter. Having agreed, the respondent No.1 issued a cheque drawn on Vijaya Bank Limited, Saroornagar branch along with covering letter on 17-11-2003 for