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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 53725

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
BEGARI VENKATESH – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
TRCRLP 118/2024



THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO + TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.118 and 119 of 2024 % Dated 02.05.2025 # Begari Venkatesh S/o. Begari Yadaiah, Aged: about 46 Years, Occupation: Business, R/o.H.No.4-55, Ambedkar Nagar Colony, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District 501 503, Telangana State ….Petitioner VERSUS $ The State of Telangana Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, At Hyderabad and three others.

… Respondents ! Counsel for Petitioner : Mr. N. Bhujanga Rao ^ Counsel for Respondents :Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon (R.1)

< GIST:

> HEAD NOTE:

? CITATIONS:

1988 SCC OnLine SC 440 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO TRANSFER CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 118 and 119 of 2024

COMMON ORDER:

These transfer criminal petitions have been filed invoking the provisions of Section 447 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’) seeking transfer of S.T.C.No.31 of 2022 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate at Peddapalli and S.T.C.No.5288 of 2022 on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Manoranjan Complex, near Exhibition Grounds, Nampally, Hyderabad, to the Court of XXII Metropolitan Magistrate at Secunderabad to be tried along with S.T.C.No.5087 of 2022.

1.1. In these two transfer criminal petitions, the parties are one and the same and the issue raised in both the cases is similar one. Hence, these two transfer criminal petitions are clubbed together and disposed of the same by a common order.

2. Facts giving rising to filing of these transfer criminal petitions briefly stated are that respondent No.3 filed complaint under Sections 190(1)(9) and 200 of Cr.P.C., in S.T.C.No.31 of 2022 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate at Peddapalli and respondent No.2 filed S.T.C.No.5288 of 2022 on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally and respondent No.4 filed S.T.C.No.5087 of 2022 on the file of the XXII Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, against the petitioner herein for the offences under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to, as ‘NI Act’). In the above said cases, they averred that respondent No.2 is owner and possessor of open land in Sy.Nos.638 and 639 to an extent of Ac.0.10 guntas and Ac.4.26 guntas, totally Ac.4.36 guntas, situated at Kanduwada village of Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, and the same was purchased through registered sale deeds vide bearing documents No.1686 dated 26.04.2003 and 1689 dated 26.04.2003. Respondent No.3 is the husband of respondent No.2 and respondent No.2 executed Special Power of Attorney in favour of respondent No.4, who is none other than her brother in respect of the above said property. The petitioner had purchased the property from respondent No.4 and accordingly, the petitioner and respondent No.4 have entered Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on 06.02.2021 at Hyderabad. The petitioner purchased the above said property for an amount of Rs.36 lakhs per acre. The total extent of land i.e., Ac.4.36 guntas, was agreed to purchase for total sale consideration of Rs1,76,40,000/-. The petitioner requested respondent Nos.2 to 4 to register the part of the land to an extent of Ac.1.20 guntas in Sy.No.639 of Kanduwada village of Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, for an amount of Rs.26 lakhs and accordingly, he issued Cheque No.630560 for an amount of Rs.12,50,000/- in favour of respondent No.2, Cheque No.630563 for an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- in favour of respondent No.3, Cheque Nos.630558 and 630559 dated 24.10.2021 for an amount of Rs.17,50,000/- in favour of respondent No.4 and respondent No.2 executed sale deed vide bearing No.4065 of 2021 dated 09.09.2021 in favour of the petitioner. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 have presented the above said cheques and the same were dishonoured for the reasons ‘funds insufficient’. Thereafter, respondent Nos.2 to 4 have filed the above S.T.C. Cases as mentioned supra.

2.1. In these transfer criminal petitions, the petitioner averred that r

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top