Allowed

V.Bheemaiah v. The State of Telangana.,rep.,Pp

Telangana HC17 Feb 2016CRLP/1908/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside a lower court order that required an 87-year-old petitioner to deposit Rs.5 lakh to give evidence under Section 315 Cr.P.C. in a cheque dishonour case. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit only Rs.5,000.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order requiring payment of Rs.5,00,000/- was set aside. The petitioner was directed to deposit Rs.5,000/- to record evidence.

V.Bheemaiah Vs The State of Telangana.,rep.,Pp — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1908 OF 2016

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) by the petitioner against order, dated 01.02.2016, in Crl.M.P. No.817 of 2015 in CC No.227 of 2008 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Prohibition & Excise, Mahabubnagar.

¶4

Heard and perused the material available on record.

¶5

The brief facts of the case are that the 2^nd respondent filed CC No.227 of 2008, before the Court below, against the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The 2^nd respondent was examined as PW.1 and the statement of the petitioner was also recorded. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application under Section 315 Cr.P.C., before the Court below to permit him to give evidence in the case. The Court below allowed the said application, on payment of costs of Rs.5,00,000/- payable directly to the 2^nd respondent. Aggrieved by the said order, the present criminal petition is filed.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is aged about 87 years and he could not able to understand the questions put-forth by the Court and therefore, he filed the impugned application before the Court below to allow him to give evidence, but the Court below while allowing the said application, imposed costs of Rs.5,00,000/-, which is onerous in nature.

¶7

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to

¶8

pass the following order:

¶9

The order, dated 01.02.2016, in Crl.M.P. No.817 of 2015 in CC No.227 of 2008 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Prohibition & Excise, Mahabubnagar, is set aside and the petitioner is directed to deposit Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as costs and on deposit of the said amount, the trial Judge is directed to fix a date for examination of the petitioner as a witness and to produce evidence, if any, on his behalf and dispose of the case in accordance with law.

¶10

With the above directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶11

______________ RAJA ELANGO, J

¶12

February 17, 2016. KTL

V.Bheemaiah v. The State of Telangana.,rep.,Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Bheemaiah v. The State of Telangana.,rep.,Pp

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

Kuchimanchi Satyanarayana Murthy, S/o.Late Gopala Rao Vs State of Ap

Nadavati Madhavi Vs State of A.P.

K. Shanker Reddy Vs P. Madhav Yadav

P.Satyanarayana, Vs K.Mahaboob Khan

M/s Frontline Advertisers, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Konda Varalakshmi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh