The criminal petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash a cheque bouncing case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was dismissed due to non-prosecution by the petitioner who was absent.
Criminal petition dismissed for non-prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2092 OF 2010
Date: 06.01.2012
Between: P.B.Krishna Bharathi …..Petitioner And M/s.Swarnadra Grafics, rep. by its Managing Partner N.Muralidhar, Secunderabad and another
…..Respondents
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2092 OF 2010
ORDER:
There was no representation for petitioner on 30.12.2011. Today also there is no representation for petitioners though the matter is specifically posted today under the caption “for dismissal”. The criminal case which is sought to be quashed is of 2007 and it pertains to an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 i.e. a cheque bouncing case. The learned counsel for first respondent/complainant is present and he says that he has also filed chief examination affidavit in the trial court. The absence of the petitioner would show that he is not interested in prosecuting the matter.
2. In the circumstances, the criminal petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
___________________________ JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR 6th January, 2012 Tjmr
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2092 OF 2010
Date: 06.01.2012
P.B. Krishna Bharathi
M/s. Swarnadra Grafics
N. Ravi Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
