SHAMEEM AKTHER
Kodam Danalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad, T. S. – Respondent
ORDER :
Since facts of the case and the issue involved in all these Criminal Petitions are similar, all these Criminal Petitions are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. Criminal Petition No.5069, 5076, 5081 and 5068 of 2021, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) are filed by the petitioner/A.2 seeking to quash the proceedings against her in C.C.No.134 of 2019 on the file of VII Special Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District, at Hastinapur and C.C.Nos.274, 275 and 276 of 2019 on the file of XII Special Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District, at Hastinapur, respectively.
3. Heard Sri B.Mohan, learned counsel for the petitioner/A.2, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1/State, Sri V.V.L.N. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/ complainant, in all the Criminal Petitions and perused the record.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/A.2 would contend that the petitioner, who is arrayed as A.2 in the subject C.Cs, is not a signatory to the subject cheques and she is falsely implicated in the subject C.Cs. No ingredients constituting the offence under Section 138 of Neg
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.