Dismissed

Sakinala Narayana v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Aug 2024CRLP/10843/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a cheque bounce case, the petitioner challenged the trial Court's order allowing the accused to compound the offence by paying the principal, interest, and costs. The High Court held the impugned order was correct in law, dismissing the petition and confirming the discharge of the accused upon payment balance.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sakinala Narayana Vs State of Telangana — Banking and Recovery | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

I I

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10843 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sdkinala Narayana, S/o Chandraiah, aged about .^{45years, Occ.HomeGaurd,} R/o. H.No.20-3-571¹ , Station Road, Bellampalli^{A/andal,AdilabadDistrict.}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 State of Telangana, Represented by its Public^{Prosecutor, High Courtfor the} State of Telangana Hyderabad.

¶12

2 Pallipaka Sanjeev, S/o Lachaiah, aged^{about.s7years,Occ. Addl.S.P (AR)} C/o Police Head Quarters, Hanmakonda,^{Warangalr't,r,",...*aT"ONDENTS}

¶13

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of^{Criminal Petition,the High Courtmay} be pleased to Quash the order in Crl.M.P.No^{1180of 2023in C'C.No149of 2016} dated 30-08-2023 on the file of Judicial^{Magistrateof First Class at Bellampalli,} Mancherial District.

¶14

l.A. NO: 1OF 2023

¶15

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition,theHighCourt may be} pleased to suspend the order in Crl.M.P.No 1180 of 2023 in C.C.No.149^{of 2016} dated 30-08-2023 in the file of Judicial^{Magistrateof First Class at Bellampally'} [/ancherial District.

¶16

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^{perusingthe Memorandumof} Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing^{the arguments of Sri K.Rama} Subba Rao, Advocate for the Petitioner^{and the PublicProsecutor on behalfof} the Respondent No.'t and of Sri K.Venumadhav,^{Advocate for the Respondent} No.2.

¶17

The Court made the following: OROER

¶18

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1O843 of2023

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C. J to quash the order dated 3O.O8.2O23 passed in Crl.M.P.No.ll80 of 2023 in C.C.No.149 of 2016 by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bellampalli.

¶21

The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 Iiled a petition before the trial Court, uide Crl.M.P.No.1 18O ol 2023, under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short'the NI ActJ read with 258 of Cr.P.C to compound the olfence and discharge him from the case as it is at initial stage. After hearing both sides at length, the trial Court on 30.08.20211 allowed the said petition compounding the offence and dir-ected respondent No.2 to pay a sum of Rs.4,60,700/-. Out cf the said amount, respondent No.2 paid an amount of Rs.3,0O,OOO/- in favour of the pctitioner by u,ay of Demand Draft. Therefore, the respondent No.2 is directed to pay the remaining tralance amount of Rs. 1,60,70O/- by way of Demand Draft before the trial Court

¶22

¶23

sl(s,J Crt.P.No.10843 of 2023

¶24

and accordingly, respondent No.2 rvas discharged under Scction 258 of Cr.P.C sr.rbject to the condition of depositing the said balance amount within seven days from the date of the order of the trial Court. Aggrieved by the said order, the pctitioner filed the present criminal petition.

¶25

Heard Sri K. Rama Subba Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the^petitiorler as well as Sri^S. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prrsecutor^appcaringon behalf of respondent No.1-State ancl Sri K.^Venumadhav, learned counsel appearing on behalf cf respondent^No.2.

¶26

4 . Learned counsel for the^petitio;rer submitted^{that the} trial Cour-t has directed respondent No.2 to^{pay interest} amount (! 60/o per annum on Rs.3,CiO,00O/-^{for 8 years4} months 14 days which comes to R-..1,5O,7OO/-^{and costs} complaint Rs. 10,0OO/- totaling to^Rs. 1,60,7OOl-.^{He further} submitted that as per the docket orcier since the^petitioner did not attend the trial Court on 19.O9.2O17,^{the complaint} was dismissed. Aggrieved by the sanre^{the petitioner fileda} criminal Appeal before this Court^{vide Crl.A.No.1629 of} 2017 and the same^{was allowedon 27.1O.2O22. He further} submitted that the trial Court^{erred irr excluding the interest}

¶27

¶28

srs,J C.LP.No.1Oa43 of 2O23

¶29

¶30

for the period from 19.09.2O17 to 26.10.2Oi7 i.e., the period pertaining to the pendency of criminal appeal, which clearly discloses that the petitioner is not at fault in prosecuting the complaint. Therefore, prayed the Court to set asicle the order of the trial Court by allowing the criminal petition.

¶31

In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the Hon,ble Supreme Court in Meters and Instruments Prktate Limited and Another os. Ko.nchan Mehtat, wherein in paragraph No. 19, it is held as follows:

¶32

"19. [n view of the above, we hoid that where the cheque amount with interest and cost as asscssed by the Court is paid by a specified date, the Court is entitled to close the proceedings in exercise of its powers under Section 143 of the Act read lrith Section 258 Cr.P.C. As alread)' obsened, normal rule for trial of cases under Chapter XVll oi the Act is to follow the summary procedure and summons trial procedurc can be followed lvhere sentence exceeding one year nray be necessary taking into account thc fact that compensation under Section 357 (3) Cr.P.C I&ith sentence of less than one year rvill not be adequate, having

¶33

' 1zota1 t scc seo

¶34

¶35

SI(S,J crt,P.No.10843 of 2O23

¶36

¶37

regard to thc anlount of cireqLrc, con.luct oI tlle accused and other circumstances."

¶38

On lhe other hand, learned ccunsel for respondent No.2 -submitted that there is no illegality in the order of the trial Court and the trial Court has rightly passed the impugned c,rder and therefore prayecl the Court to dismiss the petition.

¶39

In the light of the submissions made by both the lcarned counsel and a perusal of the material placed on record, it appears that the cheque amount is of Rs.3,0O,000/-, for u,hich, respondent No.2 is ready to deposit the said amount and to compound tJle case, Further, the trial Court allowed the petition with interest @ 67o as statcd by the petitioner in his complaint.

¶40

It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that respondent No.2/accused came for compounding the offence after 13 years after filing the complaint and Court discharged the petitioner without awarding any compensation. On going through the said contention, the case was dismissed for default in the year 2077 and further the same was restored in th,e year 2022,

¶41

¶42

SKS,J Crl.P. No. toa43 aJ 2023

¶43

t-'

¶44

for which, respondent No.2 /accused is not responsible. Further, it is the discretion of the Court in au'trrding compensation, therefore, there is no force in the said contention.

¶45

In addition to that, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the trial Court erred in excluding the period Irom 20 17 to 2022 u,hile a'a,arding interest, wherein there is no fauit on the part of respondent No.2 as he is not responsible for tl-re said delay, therefore, there is no illegality in excluding the period.

¶46

Purthermore, lezrrned counsel for the petitioner also contended that instead of awarding 9olo interest, the trial Court awarded only 67o interest. On going through the said contention, there is no agreed rate of interest and there is no provision in the Act for imposition of 97o interest. Therefore, there is no illegality in the order of the trial Court in awarding 67o interest.

¶47

1 1 . Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.2 of 2O2O in Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases

¶48

¶49

sxs,J crLP.No.10843 of 2o23

¶50

UnderSection 1li8 of Nl Act, whercin it is observed that power to stop proceedings under Section 258 of Code is not applicable to complaints under Section¹³⁸ of^{NI Act and} overruled the obscrvation of the^{Hon'bleApex Courtin} "Meters and Instruments" stating that^{lrialCourt passed} ordcrs basing on the overruled observalion, whereas, the Apex Court overmled the^judgment only to the extent^of stoppage of^proccedings but not compotrnding of the offences.

¶51

12 As held by the Hon'ble Supreme^{Courtin Meters and} Instrumeqts Private Limited,^{the Courthas to assessthe} cheque amount, interest and costs^{to be paid by a specific} date, the Court is entitled to^{close the proceedings in} exercise of its powers under^{Section 143 read with Section} 258 Cr.P.C of the Act. In^{the present case, the trial Court} has also followed the^{procedure and awardedthe costs and} also the interest, therefore,^{there is no illegalityin the order} of the trial Court and as there^{are no meritsin the criminal} petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶52

In view of the above^{discussion and as per the law laid} down by the Hon'ble^Supreme Court in^{the aforesaid}

¶53

¶54

sr(s,J Crt.P.No 1OA4s oJ 2023

¶55

rulings, the Criminal petition is dismissed conlirming the order dated 30.08.2023 passed in Crl.M.p.No. I 180 ol 2023 in C.C.No. 149 of 2016 by the iearned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bellampalli.

¶56

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending. shall also st:rncl closcd

¶57

¶58

To,

¶59

Sd/. P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶60

,TRUE COPY//

¶61

SECTION OFFICER

¶62