Disposed

M/s. Ahmeds Construction Equipment-s v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC13 Feb 2024CRLP/640/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC regarding offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. The court directed the accused to appear before the Investigating Officer for arrest procedure under Section 41A and issued notice under Arnesh Kumar guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition disposed of without quashing; accused to cooperate with investigation under Section 41A CrPC.

M/s. Ahmeds Construction Equipment-s Vs The State of… — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 640 OF 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

M/s. Ahmeds Construction Equipments, Having it office at Plot No. 1/1, Sy. No. 32. Suleman Nagar, Rajendra Nagar, Rangareddy District,

¶7

Represented by its Proprietor, Sameena Begum W/o. Khaja Mohammed Ateeq Ahmed, Rep. by her husband Khaja lvlohammed Ateeq Ahmed S/o. Mohd. Ahmed, Occ Business. R/o.H.No.5-6-960/4, Darrusalam, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶8

...Petitioner/Accused

¶9

AND

¶10

'1. The State of Telangana, Represented by Public Prosecutor, Through lnsp Admin (DD) Police Station, Hyderabad, High Court at Hyderabad, Hyderabad.

¶11

Yes Bank Limited, Rep. by its Authorised Signatory. tvlr. Sharath Kumar Pulla, S/o. Narender, Registered and corporate office Yes Bank house, Off Western Express Highway, Santacruz (East), IVumbai - 55, Branch at 3'd floor, H. No. 1- 8- 387, Agarvanshi Plaza, Huda Lane, Off S. P. Road, Secunderabad - 03.

¶12

...Respondents

¶13

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for records relating to and in connection with F.l.R.No.294 of 2023 on the file of the Xll Additional Chief ltletropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, (INSP ADMIN (DD), Police Station, Hyderabad.), and quash the same against the petitioner;

¶14

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2024

¶15

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings of F. l. R. No. 294 of 2O23 on the file of the Xll Additional Chief fvletropolitan Magistrate at Nara Hyderabad, (INSP ADMIN (DD), Police Station, Hyderabad.), pending disposal of the Criminal petition-

¶16

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri^IVOHD ISLAMDDIN ANSARI, Advocate for the Petitioner, Sri S. GANESH, Assistant Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None appeared for the Respondent No.2

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K.^SUJANA

¶19

,CRIMINAL PETITION No.64O of 2o24

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Cri rrina,l Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by^the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused, to quash the proceedings against him in Crime No.294 of 2023 on the file of the^INSP ADMIN (Df r) Police Station, Hyderabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 42O read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶22

Heald Sri Mohd. Islamuddin Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri S. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State.

¶23

WitLout going into the merits of the case, since the punishment prescribed for the offence alleged against the petitioner is less than seven (07) years, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner/accused to appear^before the Investi5gating Ofhcer on or before 2O.O2.2O24 between 02:00 p.m. rrnd O4:OO p.m. and inturn the Investigating^Officer is directed tc follow the procedure laid down under Section^41- A Cr.P.C. and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble

¶24

¶25

srrs,J CrLP,No,640 of 2O24

¶26

Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar a. State of Bihafl scrupulously. However, the petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and when required by furnishing information and documents as sought by him in concluding the investigation. The petitioner/accused shall file all the documents which he ought to hle to prove that it do not come under the criminal offences and the Investigating Officer shall consider the same before filing appropriate report before the Magistrate.

¶27

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

¶28

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

¶29

//TRUE COPY//

¶30

SD/- T.JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

To,

SECTION OFFICER

The X Additional Chief Metropolitan lvlagistrate at Nampa y, Hyderabad. 2. The Station House Officer, tN'Sp ADM,riati;; p"tice station, Hyderabad. t lffi":f;Jii,yrllrc PRosECUT.R:iidil,,.l"iir tne state or reransana, 1. ?,i3 33 3.0:I 'o'o TSLAMUDDTN ANSARIAdvocate [opuc] SP

'(zorq)^{s scc zzg}

HIGH COUTTT

DATED:1310212024

ORDER

CRLP.No.(i4O^{of 2024}

¶40

+
(,
.fl
I

¶41

1fl ESTAIA.
(
>
JJ) 2 |1 FEs 202[ a7-,
* c \r"
+

¶42

DISPOSING CRIMINAt.^PETITION

¶43

t')t r.,Y

M/s. Ahmeds Construction Equipment-s v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Ahmeds Construction Equipment-s v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D. Ramesh Babu Vs L.Narasimha Rao

B. Vikram Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Summayya Vs The State of Telangana

Mahadeva Kameswara Rao Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Ahmeds Construction Equipments, Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Ahmeds Construction Equipments Vs The State of Telangana