Allowed

V.S.Murali Krishna Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Feb 2020CRLP/921/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows a criminal revision petition seeking to modify bail conditions imposed under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court modified the deposit requirement to 20% instead of 25% and set aside the requirement for immovable property security, relying on a similar prior order.

What did the court decide?

Condition (i) modified to 20% deposit; Condition (iii) relating to immovable property set aside; Conditions (ii) and (iv) upheld.

V.S.Murali Krishna Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra… — Cheque Dishonour | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HON’BLE Ms.JUSTICE J.UMA DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.921 OF 2020

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

This petition is filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings in so far as the conditions imposed in the order dated 31.12.2019, in Crl.M.P.No.1315 of 2019 in Crl.A.No.393/2019, on the file of the VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for the Trial of Offences against Women, Nellore.

¶4

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶5

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that in similar circumstances, this Court passed an order dated 26.12.2019 in Crl. Revision Case No.1357 of 2019, modifying some conditions and requests the Court to pass similar order.

¶6

The trial Court, by Judgment dated 29.11.2019, in C.C.No.121 of 2018, found the petitioner/accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 read with 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and directed to pay compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- together with interest at 9% per annum. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner preferred Appeal. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, by the order impugned in this petition, while suspending the sentence

¶7

¶8

and enlarging the petitioner on bail, imposed the following conditions:

¶9

(i) that the petitioner shall deposit 25% of the compensation amount of Rs.1,12,500/-, before the trial Court on or before 25^th February, 2020;

¶10

(ii) that the petitioner shall execute a self bond for Rs.50,000/with two sureties for likesum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore;

¶11

(iii) that the petitioner shall furnish security of immovable property or bank guarantee for the remaining 3/4^th of the compensation amount of Rs.3,37,500/- on or before 25^th February, 2020 and

¶12

(iv) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of this court without prior permission from this Court.

¶13

The petitioner and his wife involved in six cases. All are filed by the 2^nd respondent. When the petitioner filed similar application in another case in Crl.R.C.1357 of 2019, this Court vide order, dated 26.12.2019, modified condition No. (i) and relaxed condition No.(iii) by set it aside, while holding the condition Nos.(ii) and (iv) shall hold good.

¶14

In view of the above, this Criminal Petition is disposed of in terms of the order, dated 26.12.2019 in Crl.R.C.No.1357 of 2019.

¶15

Accordingly, in so far as condition No.(i) supra, the petitioner shall deposit 20% instead of 25% of the compensation amount

¶16

¶17

before the trial Court within four (04) weeks from today; and condition No.(iii) supra, directing to furnish immovable property as security is set aside. The other conditions viz., condition Nos.(ii) and (iv) mentioned supra, shall hold good.

¶18

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall

¶19

also stand closed.

¶20

________________ J. UMA DEVI, J

¶21

Dated 19.02.2020 Note : Furnish copy by 20.02.2020 B/O KA

¶22

V.S.Murali Krishna Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.S.Murali Krishna Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tadi Pededi Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kovvuri Subba Reddy, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Kkaranam Mohana Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Chivakula Devudu at Chawakula Demudu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sk.Nazeer Basha Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Pujala Durga Prasad Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh