THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.6629 of 2021

ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in STC.No.3 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Gajwel, Siddipet District, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as the sole accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘the Act’).

2. Heard Mr.M.V.Suresh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the order dated 24.08.2021, he has sent personal notice to respondent No.2 through registered post with acknowledgment due, and the same was returned with postal endorsement stating ‘want of house number’. He further submits that he has sent notice to the address mentioned in the complaint in STC No.3 of 2021. He further submits that respondent No.2, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under the provisions of Sections

138 and 142 of the Act, filed the complaint, and the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance thereof. He also submits that the petitioner has not issued any cheque to respondent No.2. There is no legally enforceable debt between the petitioner and respondent No.2, and the ingredients under the provisions of the Act are not attracted. He further submits that one Ms. Y. Sunkamma approached the petitioner through a friend of the petitioner and promised that she could secure a loan of Rs. 10 crores for the petitioner. Believing the version of Ms. Sunkamma, the petitioner issued four blank cheques bearing Nos. 153164, 153568, 153562 and 153563. However, Ms. Sunkamma, despite collecting the said cheques from the petitioner, did not arrange any loan for him. On the other hand, she misused two cheques bearing Nos. 153164 and 153568. Based on cheque bearing No.153562, dated 23.01.2021, respondent No.2 initiated proceedings against the petitioner at the instance of Ms. Sunkamma. Therefore, there is no legally enforceable debt, and the ingredients under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act are not attracted. Hence, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner constitute a clear abuse of the process of law and are liable to be quashed.

4. Per contra, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the grounds raised by the petitioner involve disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated in the present criminal petition. The same must be decided during the course of trial, and the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashment of the proceedings by exercising the inherent powers conferred under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. He further submits that during the pendency of the criminal petition, the main STC trial has commenced, and STC No.3 of

2021 is posted for the cross-examination of PW1.

5. By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to raise all the grounds pleaded in the present criminal petition before the trial court.

6. The above submission is not opposed by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.

7. Taking into consideration the above submissions, and in view of the matter having been posted for cross-examination of PW1, this Court is not inclined to quash STC No.3 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Gajwel, Siddipet District, at this stage, as the grounds pleaded by the petitioner have to be adjudicated before the trial Court. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all grounds available under law, including those pleaded in the present criminal petition before the trial Court.

8. Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

06.10.2025 Note: Issue CC in a week b/o

sa