SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 63

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
J. SREENIVAS RAO, J.
Pogula Haritha W/o. Naveen Kumar - Petitioner
 Versus
The State of Telangana  Hyderabad, Rep. by Public Prosecutor - Respondents
Criminal Petition No. 757 of 2025
Decided on : 24-06-2025

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. K. Sai Sri Harsha
For the Respondents: Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon (R.1)

The court confirmed that absent a company in complaint does not impair proceedings; the enforceability of the debt under mutual agreement is to be resolved at trial.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 528 - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 and 139 - Quashing of proceedings - Petition dismissed as no merit found to quash complaints regarding non-payment of cheques issued by the petitioner - The complainant alleged misappropriation of funds intended for company by petitioner. (Paras 1, 2, 6, 12)

(B) Evidence and Burden of Proof - The presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act shifts burden to the accused once the complainant proves the execution of the instrument - The dispute over enforceability of debt must be resolved through trial. (Paras 9.1, 11)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner entered into a business partnership leading to the establishment of a company, receiving funds from the complainant for business, later accused of misappropriating those funds. Complaints were filed under IPC and NI Act for cheque dishonor.

Findings of Court:
The trial Court is directed to decide the matter on merits based on evidence, without influence from this order.

Issues: The main issues include the questioned enforceability of the debt and the legality of the complaint due to absence of the company party in the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the absence of the company in complaints does not invalidate proceedings; the allegations made must be adjudicated in a trial setting.

Result: Criminal petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2)
2. claims made by the petitioner (Para 3)
3. arguments for the petitioner against the complaint's maintainability. (Para 4)
4. arguments for the respondent supporting the complaint. (Para 5)
5. court's analysis of facts and applicable law. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10 , 11)
6. final decision and directive to the trial court. (Para 12 , 13)

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to, as ‘ BNSS ’) seeking to quash the proceedings in S.T.C.NI. No.49 of 2024 on the file of the VIII Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal at Athevelly.

2. Facts giving rise to filing of the criminal petition briefly stated are that respondent No.2/de facto filed complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, wherein it is averred that he is having cordial relationship with the husband of the petitioner, namely, Pogula Naveen Kumar, since more than two decades. The petitioner and her husband approached him with a business proposal i.e., to engage into the manufacturing and sale of various chemicals, pharmaceuticals and botanical products. The petitioner and her husband registered a company under the name and style of ‘Acquire Labs Private Limited’ on 11.10.2019. In the said company, the petitioner is one of the Directors, who holds cheque power and he is second Director and one Mr. Katta Durga Reddy, who is his brother-in-law, is also third Director. Subsequent to establishing of the above said Company, the petitioner compelled him to adjust the substantial amount i.e., more than Rs.1 Crore on multiple instances by selling his hard earned properties and through several other sources, believing that the said funds would only be exclusively utilized by the petitioner only to fortify the company. After receiving the above said amount, the petitioner and her husband have turned up and started showing their true colors by postponing one pretext or the other, when he requested the petitioner and her husband to submit all the accounts/statements with regard to the turnover of the company. In spite of the same, the petitioner has not furnishing the statements of 2021-2022.

2.1. It is further averred in the complaint that he obtained the statements through the available sources and there after he came to know that all the funds facilitated by him were mis-appropriated by the petitioner and her husband and they diverted the above said amounts in to their personal accounts. At that stage, he filed a complaint at Alwal police Station and the same was registered as Crime No.791 of 2022 on 18.11.2022 for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’) and the same is pending.

2.2. While things stood thus, the petitioner and her husband approached him on multiple occasions with a prompt assurance that they would refund all the funds facilitated by him towards the company. The said commitment was made by entering into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 13.04.2023 between him and the petitioner and her husband and they agreed to pay an amount of Rs.1 Crore within a period of six months, wherein one Mr. Gunda Laxmi Raajan S/o.Narayana stood as a surety holder and the petitioner had issued three (3) cheques in his favour. However, the petitioner has not paid the above said amount as agreed by her. At that stage, he presented the cheques issued by the petitoner in his bank on 17.01.2024 and the said cheques were returned with an endorsement ‘funds insufficient’. Thereafter, he got issued the statutory notice under Section 138 (b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (for short, ‘the NI Act’) through his counsel on 15.02.2024 calling upon the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.1 Crore covered under the cheques. Even after receiving the said notice, the petitioner has not paid the amount nor issued any reply. Thereafter he filed complaint

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top