Allowed

K.M. Sridhar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Jan 2024CRLP/8198/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought setting aside an order dismissing his application to file additional documents in a cheque dishonour case. The High Court allowed the petition, observing documents were already on record in similar litigation and previous acquittal was pending. Trial directed to conclude within six months.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 10.07.2023 setting aside Crl.M.P.1435 of 2023 set aside; trial Court directed to permit petitioner to file documents and conclude trial within six months.

K.M. Sridhar Vs The State of Telangana — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³²¹⁹ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY^{OF JANUARY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE^{T.MADHAVI DEVI}

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8't98 OF²⁰²³

¶7

Between:

¶8

K.M. Sridhar, S/o. Mutyalu, Occ. Business,^{R/o. Plot No.D, Anand Nagar Colony,} Behind Anand Theatre, Rasoolpura, Secu nd-'rabad-3.

¶9

... Petitioner/Accused

¶10

AND

¶11

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State ofTelangana at Hyderabad Telangana.

¶12

T Alender Singh, S/o. T Rajender Singh,^{Occupation. Business, Resident13-} 4-17 1 I Al 1, Karwan Sabsimandi, Hyderabad-06.

¶13

... Res po n de nUc om Plaina nts

¶14

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^{pra'ying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of^{Criminal Petition,the High Court maybe} pleased to quash the criminal petition case duly setting aside^{the orderdated} 10.07.2023 in Crl.MP.No.1435t2O23 in CC.Nl.No.1546^{of 2021passed by X} Metropolitan lvlagistrate at Hyderabad ;

¶15

l.A. NO: 1OF 2023

¶16

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P C^{prayingthat in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition, the High Court may be} pleased to stay of all further proceedings in^pursuance of CC.Nl.No.1546^{of 2021} pending on the file of X l/etropolitan lrrlagistrate at Hyderabad,^{pendingdisposal of} the present Criminal Petition.

¶17

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^{perusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon^{hearingthe argumentsof Sri S LAKSHMI} KANTH, Advocate for the Petrtioner.^{Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the} Respondent No.'1 and None appeared for the Respondent^No.2

¶18

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶19

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI

¶20

CRTMINAL PETITION NO.8198 OF 2023

¶21

ORDER

¶22

In this Crirninal Petition, the petitioner is seeking setting aside of the order dt.10.07 .2023 in Crl.M.P.No .1435 of 2023 in CCNI.No. 1 546 of 2021 on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad dismissing the application of the petitioner for producing certain other documents relevant to the case

¶23

It is submitted that the trial Courl has considered the written arguments in the said petition and observed that the documents filed by the petitioner relate to CCNI.No.4I I of 2018 which is an independent cause of action since the cheque number in CCNI.No.411 of 2018 and the cheque number of the present case are different.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the documents relevant to the case can be produced at any time or stage of the trial and the documents sought to be filed are relevant to this case. He placed reliance upon the judgment of the High Court of Madras in

Crl.P.No.8l98 o12023

the case of Sethuraman @^{SethuramachandranVs' Subbiahrand} submitted that the^{powerunder Section482 of Cr.P.C. canbe exercised} in a given case provided^{that the Court is satisfiedthat substantial} injustice would be caused to the^{parly by not exercising inherent powers'}

¶29

The leamed counsel for respondent^{No.2 opposedthe same and} submitted that the trial in the^{caseis at the last stage and filing of} documents now is only to^{prolong the litigationand not for anyother} purpose. He submitted that the said documents^{are not connected to the} trial in any way.

¶30

Having regard to the rival contentions^{and the materialon record,} this Court finds that the^{petitionerhad issued two chequesand two} different cases have been filed against^{him for dishonour of the cheques} and the other case, i.e., CCNI.No.4ll^{of 2018 is in respect of one of the} cheques and the petitioner has^{beenacquitted of the same and the} acquittal has not become final^{as an appealhas already been filed} against the same and is^{pending adjudication.The petitioner only} wanted to fi le the said documents as additional^{documents in this case} lor consideration of his case. In view of^{the fact that the documents}

¶31

'^{20 lo (2) MwN(cr.) DCClo4}

Crl.P.No.8l98 ot2023

sought to be filed by the^{petitioner ale already on record in respectof the} very same or similar litigation,^{this Courtdoes not find any reasonas to} why the same should not have been^{permitted to be filed.}

¶36

In view olthe same, the^{order of the X Metropolitan Magistrate at} Hyderabad dt.l}.O7 .2023ⁱⁿ Crl.M.P.No^{.1415 of 2023 in CCNI.No.1546} of 2021 is set aside and the trial^{Courtis directed to permitthe petitioner} to take on record the said^{documentsand thereafter proceed in} accordance with law. Since^{the old C.C. is of the year 201 8 and it is} renumbered as C(lNI.No.¹⁵⁴⁶ of^{2021, this Courldeemsit fit and} proper to direct the trial Coun to^{concludethe trial within a period of six} months from the date of receipt^{of a copyof this order. The parties are} directed to cooperate by filing^{all the relevant documents and submitting}

¶37

their arguments.

¶38

With the above directions, this Criminal^{Petitionis allowed.}

¶39

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if^{any, in this Criminal Petition}

shall stand clo d.

SD/.K. VENKAIAH

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

sEcroN/o FFICER

To,

The X lvletropolitan^{Magistrate at HyCerabad:}

¶47

The XV Special lvlagrstrate,^Hyderabad.

¶48

The Station House Officer,^{Begumpet PoliceStation,Hyderabad.}

¶49

Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,^{HighCourt for the State of Telangana,} Hyderabad.IOUT]

¶50

One CC to SRI S L-AKSHlvll^{KANTH Advocate} [OPUC] 6 Jwo CD Copies d;N'SP

HIGH COURT

DATED:0210112024

ORDER

CRLP.No.8198^{of 2023}

¶55

1HE sIA 14:
k o
q ),(
3 J 2z APR2024 o
li
*
t {) gO
€spnrcs

¶56

ALLOWING^{THE CRIMINAL PETITION}

K.M. Sridhar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.M. Sridhar 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

Smt K. Ambika Vs Sri D.S Lokesh Kumar, I.A.S

Siragni Muralidhar Rao, Vs The State of Telangana

Siragni Muralidhar Rao Vs The State of Telangana

P. Vajra Kumar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Gaddam Vivek Vs Damodhar Reddy

Mohd. Abdul Samad Vs The State of Telangana