Disposed

Nandhini Constructions, v. The State of Telangana

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Nov 2023CRLP/666/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings for cheque bounce due to alleged stop payment rather than insolvency, the High Court did not decide on quashing. Instead, it directed the petitioners to voluntarily surrender before the Trial Court within seven days to secure their presence

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed. Petitioners directed to surrender before Trial Court within seven days and file application to recall warrant with surety.

Nandhini Constructions, Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ::^AMARAV

¶2

FRIDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA^{JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA}

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 666 OF 2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

Nandhini Constructions, Represented by its Proprietor Pallapu Ramudu @ Ramu, Son of Subbaiah, Aged about years, Resident of D.No.7-3-18-17,^Sagar Enclave, Bairamalguda, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 500 035.

¶8

Pallapu Ramudu @ Ramu, Son of Subbaiah, Aged about years, Resident of D.No.7-3-18-17, Sagar Enclave, Bairamalguda, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 500 035.

¶9

...Petitioners/Accused 1 & 2

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi, Amaravathi.

¶12

Hussain Apparels, Represented by Proprietor Harivaram Hussain Basha, Aged about 38 years, Residing at Door No.4/1478, Burrasadumatam, Proddatur - 516360, Kadapa District, A.P.

¶13

...Respondents/Complainant

¶14

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.0 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to recall the NBWs issued in CrLM.P.No.4992 of 2019 in C.C.No.208 of 2019 dated 27.12.2019 on the file of I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Proddatur, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition

¶15

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2020

¶16

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.0 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to recall the NBWs issued in Crl.M.P.No.4992 of 2019 in C.C.No.208 of 2019 dated 27.12.2019 on the file of I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Proddatur, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition; and pass

¶17

I.A. NO: 3 OF 2020

¶18

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.0 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in CC No.208 of 2019 on the file of I Additional Judicial

¶19

Magistrate of First Class, Proddatur, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition; and pass

¶20

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P Ravi Shanker,Advocate for the Petitioner and the Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri P V N Kiran Kumar Advocate for the Respondent No.2

¶21

The Court made the following:

¶22

¶23

THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE V. JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA.

¶24

Cr1.P.No.666 of 2020

¶25

ORDER:-

¶26

Heard Sri P. Ravi Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri P. V. N. Kiran Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing respondent No.1 / State.

¶27

The instant petition has been filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.208 of 2019 on the file of I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Proddatur.

¶28

Petitioners herein are Accused Nos. 1 and 2 and respondent No.2 is complainant in C.C.No. 208 of 2019.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners submitted two cheques along with their application to APCO for supply of Sch000i Uniforms in the year 2016, those cheques were not returned to the petitioners. Legal noitce has been issued in the year 2018, for that he has got issued a suitable reply mentioning all the facts. It is not the case of the dishonor of cheques for `insufficient funds' in the account. It is

¶30

¶31

a case of "stop payment" due to which, cheques are dishonoured. The defacto complainant colluded with some persons relating to APCO and lodged this false complaint. The amount involved is Rs.32,00,000/-. If really any amount is due, they would have filed a civil suit for recovery of that amount. Learned counsel further submits that continuing the proceedings against the petitioners is mere abuse process of law. Accordingly, prays for quashmerit of the case against the petitioners.

¶32

Per contra, refuting the above submissions learned counsel for the respondent No.2 would submit that, Non Bailable Warrant is pending against the petitioners. Due to which, the Court could not proceed further. Despite an appointment of Advocate Commissioner to secure the presence of the petitioner, he has been evading. Necessary directions may be issued to the petitioner for his presence before the Trial Court.

¶33

6 At^this juncture,^learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that when they have filed the petition to recall the Non Bailable Warrant against the petitioner, the Court insisted the presence of the petitioner. Hence, the Court may give appropriate directions to the petitioner in this regard.

¶34

¶35

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel representing both parties, it is apposite to direct the petitioner to voluntarily surrender before the Trial Court and file proper application to recall the warrant. On filing such application, the Trial Court may pass approproiate orders on the very same day, after obtaining some surety to secure his presence for the furture adjournments during the course of trial.

¶36

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to appear before the Trial Court within seven days from this day and file appropriate applciation to recall the warrant and Court may pass appropriate orders on the very same day and obtain some surety to secure the presence of the petitioner during the course of trial.

¶37

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶38

SD!- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR

¶39

//TRUE COPY// SECTION! OFFICER

¶40

To,

¶41

The I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Proddatur, Kadapa District 2. One CC to Sri. P Ravi Shanker Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri. P V N Kiran Kumar Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies Stu vna

HIGH COURT

DATED:17/11/2023

ORDER

CRLP.No.666 of 2020

pF ANDH/
g N0V 2023
-::- Current Section
\ESPATC

¶47

DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION

Nandhini Constructions, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandhini Constructions, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Teki Venkateswara Rao Vs Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P

Ch. Srinivas Goud Vs Life Insurance Corporation of India Limtied

Sunkara Sunil Kumar, Vs The Station House Officer

A Madhsudhana Rao Vs Chintala Phanidra Rao

A.K.Dhanapal Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B. Prasad Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh