Allowed

M/s. Sri Sai Amrutha Pharma Pvt. Ltd. and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC24 Dec 2021CRLRC/49/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a revision under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C regarding offences under Section 138 NI Act, the High Court allowed the petition and acquitted the petitioners after recording that they had settled the dispute via Lok Adalat during pendency.

What did the court decide?

Judgements dated 28.9.2018 and 07.1.2020 set aside; petitioners acquitted; accused permitted to withdraw deposited amount; pending petitions closed.

M/s. Sri Sai Amrutha Pharma Pvt. Ltd. and 2 Others Vs The… — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶5

tMt SI NC E 4 OF 20

¶6

criminar Revision case fired under section 397 & 401 of cr.p.c aggrieved by the Judgment made in crr.A.No.1017 0f 2018 dated 07to1r2o2o on the fire of the court of the rV Additionar Metroporitan sessions Judge at Secunderabad preferred against the Judgment made in c.c.No.8 of 2016 dared 28ro9r2oi g on the fire of the XX Additional Chief lvletropolitan ivlagistrate at Secunderabad.

¶7

Between:

¶8

IV/s. Sri Sai Amrutha pharma p!t. Ltd., ptot Nos.53, 54, 73 and 74, Sy.No.102, Raichur Gromh centre, Rarchur, office ;i^- H - errJt-Hiz, 'r]iri '"ro"r, It4adhuranagar, Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar, HyOerabad. nep.ni its iir"c]Jr, Venkatesulu Adoni.

¶9

P. Sridhar M/s sri sai Amrutha pharma pvt. Ltd., H Brack-H2r, First froor, Madhuranagar, Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar, Hyderaba;.

¶10

S. Venklt.9_s,u],!Adoni,,Age 55 yrs,M/s Sri Sai Amrutha pharma pvt. Ltd., H Black nzt, t-rst lloor, Madhuranagar, sanjeeva Reddy Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶11

...REVISION PETTTTONERS/AppELLANTS 1 to 3

¶12

AND

¶13

The state of relangana, Rep. by its public prosecutor, High court at Hyderabad.

¶14

M/s Roto Dyni Marketing corporation, a proprietary concern havinq its office at qlot no.1 , Vimannagar, Rasoolpeta, Seiunderabaii Rep. lts proprietor K.V. Rama Rao' s/o K Narayana Rao

¶15

...RES'.NDENTS/RES'.NDENTS

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶17

Petition under Section 397 (1) Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated !n the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the sentence of imprisonment made in judgment dl0710112020 in Criminal Appeal No. 1017 of 2018 on the file of Vl Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad, which was passed confirming the conviction and sentence of imprisonment made in^judgment dt:2810912018 passed in C.C.No.08 of 2016 on file of XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan lt4agistrate, Secunderabd, including^payment of compensation of Rs. 3,50,0001 to the second Respondent.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI K. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI PADMARAO BHOOMPALLY

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K' LAKSHMAN}

¶24

Crl.Rc.N o,49^{oF 2020}

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

The petitioners^{are Accused Nos'1to 3 in C'C'No'8of 2076'} The offence^{alleged 'againstthem is under Section 138 of} Negotiable Instruments^{Act'The trial Court convicted the} petitioners vide^{orderdated'28'9'2018in C'C'No'8 of 2016'} against which,^{they have preferred Criminal AppealNo'1017 of} 2018. The^{said appeal was dismissed vide judgmentdated} 7 .l.2O2O by the^{lower appellate court'Feelingaggreieved} thereby, the^{present revision is filed' During the pendency of the} present revision, the^{partieshave enteredinto compromiseand} approached the^Lok Adalat^{and the Lok Adalatpassed Awardon} IO.7.2O2l on certain^{terms,including6%o amount on the cheque} amount of Rs.2,62,6741- i.e.^{Rs. 15,760/- by way of costbefore} the Secreta-r5r, High Court^{LegalServicesCommitteeas per the} guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶27

The learned counsel for petitioners has filed copy of^the receipt in proof of payment of the said amount of Rs.15,76O/towards 6%o ol the cheque amount. Copy of the Award and original receipt is placed on record

¶28

In view of the above, this Revision is allowed and the judgments of the Courts below i.e. judgment dated 28.9.2018 in C.C.No.8 of 2016 on the file of XVI Additional Judge-cum-XX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad and judgment dated 7.I.2O2O in Crl.A.No.1017 of 2018 on the file of

¶29

-=*'-

¶30

¶31

Special Judge for trial of Offences under SCs & S?s (pOA) Act_ cum-Vl Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad are hereby set aside. The petitioners, herein are acquitted. Accuse No.1 is at liberty to withdraw an amount of Rs.l,2l,661 /_ deposited before the lower Court as per the directions of this Court in terms of the Award dated lOJ2O2l by taking appropriate steps. Miscellaneous petitions pending if arry, shall

¶32

starid closed.

¶33

SD/-CH.VE NKATESHWARULU DEPUTY REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// ili

¶34

SECTION OFFICER

¶35

To, 1. The lV Additional l\iletropolitan Sessions Judge at Secunderabad. (with records)

¶36

2, The XX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Secunderabad. 3. One CC to Sri K. IVadhusudhan Reddy, Advocqte [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Padma Rao Bhoompally, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI 6. Two CD Copies 7. One Spare Copy ks gbr+

HIGH^COURT

DATED:^2411212021

ORDER

ffi
oo 21Fen n??
'..i:-;::'::

¶42

CRL.RC.No.49 o12020

¶43

ALLOWING THE^CRL.RC

¶44

3l I

M/s. Sri Sai Amrutha Pharma Pvt. Ltd. and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Sri Sai Amrutha Pharma Pvt. Ltd. and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana 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

I Shiva Kumar and 4 Others Vs The State of Telangana and Another

J. Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Tungala Laxmi Raghava Vs State of Telangana

Naresh Kumar Yalla Vs The State of Telangana

Alladi Laxmaiah Vs State of Telangana

Md Omer Vs The State of Telangana