THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.11093 OF 2022

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.789 of 2022 on the file of the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-IX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal, Cyberabad, registered for the offences under Sections 420, 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’).

02. Heard Sri Mohd. Muzaferullah, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and Smt.S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent No.1. Even after service of notice by way of news paper publication, none appeared on behalf of the unofficial respondent No.2. Perused the material on record.

03. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant-respondent No.2 engaged in business under the name and style of M/s.MSLG Infrastructures, situated at Rajshri Diamante, Kompally Village. In the year 2017, the petitioner-accused came into contact with the respondent No.2 and represented that he was engaged in business dealings, possessed land parcels for solar projects, and had executed various projects for different companies. In September 2019, the petitioner-accused approached the respondent No.2 and requested a hand loan of Rs.41,00,000/- to meet his urgent business requirements, assuring repayment within a period of one year. For which, the respondent No.2 advanced a total sum of Rs.41,00,000/- to the petitioner-accused on different dates through seven cheques. However, even after the expiry of the stipulated period, the petitioner-accused failed to repay the said amount. When the respondent No.2 demanded repayment, the petitioner-accused willfully refused to discharge the liability. Hence, the respondent No.2 lodged a complaint against the petitioner-accused.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-accused is nothing to do with the alleged offences. It is contended that no dishonest or fraudulent intention can be attributed to the petitioner-accused from the inception of the transaction. All the allegations leveled against the petitioner-accused are false, baseless, and fabricated for the purpose of the present case, being far from truth. It is further submitted that there is no incriminating material on record to substantiate the allegations made against the petitioner-accused. The dispute, if any, is purely civil in nature, and respondent No.2 is attempting to give a criminal colour to a civil dispute. The contents of the charge sheet do not disclose the necessary and essential ingredients required to constitute the offences under Sections 420 and 506 of the IPC.

05. With the above submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused while praying for the quashment of criminal proceedings relied upon a decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in Sripati Singh (since deceased) through his son Gaurav Singh v. The State of Jharkhand and another, Criminal Appeal Nos.1269-1270 of 2021, wherein it was held at Paragraph Nos.11 & 12 that:

“11. In the background of what has been taken note by us and the conclusion reached by the High Court, insofar as the High Court arriving at the conclusion that no case punishable under Section 420 IPC can be made out in these facts, we are in agreement with such conclusion. This is due to the fact that even as per the case of the appellant the amount advanced by the appellant is towards the business transaction and a loan agreement had been entered into between the parties. Under the loan agreement, the period for repayment was agreed and the cheque had been issued to ensure repayment. It is no doubt true that the cheques when presented for realisation were dishonoured. The mere dishonourment of the cheque cannot be construed as an act on the part of the respondent No.2 with a deliberate intention to cheat and the mens rea in that regard cannot be gathered from the point the amount had been received. In the present