Allowed

E.Govindrajulu v. the State of A.P. and Another

Andhra Pradesh HC6 Nov 2023CRLRC/417/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Court allowed the criminal revision upon recording a joint memo of settlement between the petitioner and the respondent. The Court opined that continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law and acquitted the petitioner for a charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision case was allowed; conviction and sentence were set aside; the petitioner/accused was acquitted.

E.Govindrajulu Vs the State of A.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SRINIVAS

¶2

I.A.Nos. 1 and 2 of 2022 In/And Criminal Revision Case No.417 of 2012

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Criminal Revision Caseis filed by the petitioner/accused, aggrieved by the judgment dated 09.03.2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No.118 of 2011 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge,Anantapur, whereby the conviction and sentence recorded against the revision petitioner/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in the judgment dated 13.09.2011 passed in C.C.No.136 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rayadurg, was confirmed.

¶5

Sri Vishnu Vardhan, learned counsel representing Sri

¶6

K. Maheswara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent-Shiram City Union Finance Limited stated that the 2^nd respondentmerged with Shriram Transport Finance Limited and at present, the said company named as Shriram Finance Limitedand the said company has givenSpecial Power of Attorney in favour of oneN.Suresh Babu, who is Regional Recovery Manager.

¶7

It is represented that both the parties have settled the dispute amicably out of the Court. In view of the settlement

¶8

arrived at between both the parties, they filed I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2022 along with joint memo signed by both the parties seeking to permit them to record the compromise.

¶9

Both the parties are present before this Court and they are identified by the respective counsel.

¶10

Sri. N. Suresh Babu,who is Regional Recovery Manager stated that entire cheque amount was received and filed petitions for compromise on behalf of ShiramFinance Limited, formerly known as Shriram City Union Finance Company Limited.He furtherstated that he has no objection to allow the present Revision Case.

¶11

Hence, this Court opines that continuation of further proceedings against the petitioner would amount to abuse of process of law.

¶12

Recording the said joint memo, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed and I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2022 are allowed setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded in the judgment dated 13.09.2011 passed in C.C.No.136 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rayadurg,as confirmed in judgment dated 09.03.2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No.118 of 2011 on the file of thelearnedSessions Judge,Anantapurand thereby the

¶13

petitioner/accused is acquitted for the charge under Section 138 of

¶14

the Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶15

Interim orders granted earlier, if any, stand vacated.

¶16

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶17

________________________ JUSTICE V.SRINIVAS

¶18

Date: 06.11.2023 DSV

¶19

152

¶20

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SRINIVAS

¶21

I.A. Nos. 1 and 2 of 2022

¶22

in/and

¶23

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.417 of 2012

¶24

Date:06.11.2023

¶25

DSV

E.Govindrajulu v. the State of A.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.Govindrajulu v. the State of A.P. and Another

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

Medpati Suryanarayana Reddy at Suryayya at Sura Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K.K.Prahallada Rao, Vs the State of Andhr Pradesh Rep by Pp.

Lingamaneni Durga Rajya Lakshmi Vs Sri Dattapriya Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd.

Munnangi Venkateswara Rao, Vs Alla Sridhara Reddy and Another

Maddi Gopala Rao, Vizianagaram. Vs the State of a.P., Rep. by P.P., Hyderabad.

Serasani Vijaya Babu Vs the State, Rep.Byits P.P