THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

CRIMINAL PETITION NOs.12586, 12590 & 12592 & 12595 of 2024

COMMON ORDER

I have heard Mr. Dhananjay Chavan, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State.

2. In all these petitions, the petitioner, who is the complainant, seeks prosecution of respondent No. 2 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NI

Act’).

3. Since the petitioner raises an identical legal issue in each of these petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by

this common order.

4. Criminal Petition No. 12595 of 2024 has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’), seeking quashment of the Docket Order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the Court of the VII Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Hyderabad, in S.T.C. N.I. No. 1275 of 2023.

Criminal Petition No.12586 of 2024 is filed under Section 528 of the BNSS for quashment of the Docket Order dated 30.01.2024 passed by

the VII Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hyderabad in STC NI No.1277 of 2023.

Criminal Petition No.12592 of 2024 is filed under Section 528 of the BNSS for quashment of the Docket Order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the VII Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hyderabad in STC NI No.1325 of 2023.

Criminal Petition No.12590 of 2024 is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS, 2023’) for quashment of the Docket Order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the VII Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hyderabad in STC NI No.1279 of

2023.

5. By the impugned orders, the learned Magistrate converted the Summary Trial Cases into Summons Cases and consequently renumbered them as Complaint Cases. The petitioner prays that the impugned orders be set aside and that the matters be restored to their original numbers, so that the proceedings may be conducted in accordance with the procedure prescribed for Summary Trial Cases.

6. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the petitioner had advanced a hand loan to respondent No. 2 pursuant to promissory notes executed on 22.11.2019. In discharge of the said liability, respondent No. 2/accused issued certain cheques drawn on UCO Bank, Koti Branch, Hyderabad. Upon presentation, the cheques were dishonoured with the endorsement 'funds insufficient.' The statutory notice issued thereafter was returned with the endorsement 'unclaimed.' Consequently, the complaints came to be registered as Summary Trial Cases (STCs).

7. In October 2023, the accused was examined, during which he denied the allegations. He contended that the petitioner was engaged in chit fund business and that, in the course of related chit transactions, fifteen cheques had been issued, which were misused by being pressed into service in these complaints. The accused further asserted that no statutory notice had been duly served upon him. He pleaded not guilty and requested a trial.

8. On 30.01.2024, respondent No. 2 filed defence statements, whereupon the trial Court passed the impugned order converting the proceedings and posting the case for regular trial. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed applications seeking restoration of the complaints to their original status as Summary Trial Cases. However, the said applications were returned on 02.08.2024. Hence, the present petitions are filed, seeking quashment of the docket order dated 30.01.2024 whereby the cases were converted from STC to C.C. for detailed trial.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the trial Court, without examining any cogent material or recording valid reasons, mechanically converted the STCs into Complaint Cases (CCs). Such action, it is urged, runs contrary to the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 2 of 2020, In Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 of the NI Act, as well as the practice dir