The High Court allowed two criminal revisions filed under Sections 397 and 401 of CrPC in a cheque bounce case. It set aside the imprisonment sentence and increased the fine while upholding the conviction.
The sentence of six months imprisonment was set aside and the fine was increased to Rs. 1 Lakh.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
IVONDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 15 37 AND 't635 0F 2009
Revision filed under Section 397(1) & 401 of CrPC against the Judgment dt. 12-05-2009 in C.C.No. 126 ot 2008, on the fite of the XVt Addl. Judge -cum- XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, which was confirmed dt.'1 1-9-2009 in Crl.A.No. 142 of 2009 by the I Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
cRL.R.C.1s37l2009
Between:
N.ESWAR RAO, S/O Ramanadham, Business, R/o 3-6-200, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER/APPELLANTACCUSED
AND
...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2009(CRLRCMP. NO: 21 36 0F 2009)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioner on bail afler suspending the operation of the sentence imposed in CC.No. 126 of 20O8, dt. 12-5-2009 on the file of the XVI Addl. Judgecum- XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, which was confirmed by the I Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Crl.A.No.142 ot 2009, dt. 11-9-2009, pending disposal of the Crl.R.C .
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. P NAGENDRA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent.l : SRI JYOTHI ESWAR GOGINENI
Counsel for the Respondent.2: PUBLIC ?ROSECUTOR (TG)
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1635 oF 2009
Revision filed under Section 397 & 4O1 of CrPC against lhe Judgment dated 12-05-2009 in C.C.No. 126 of 2OOB on the file of the XVI Additional Judge-cumXX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.
Between:
N.ESWAR RAO, HII\IAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD, S/O. LAtE RAMANAdhAM R/o. 3-6-200, Himayatnagar, Hyderabad.
PETITIONE RYCOMPLAINANT
AND
. -... RESPONDENT/ACCUSED
..,RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner :SRl. JYOTHI ESWAR GOGINENI
Counsel for the Respondent.l : SRI. P NAGENDRA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent.2 : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG)
The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL REVISIO N CASE Nos.1537 and 1635 OF 2OO9
COMMON ORDER:
2
7 . As seen from the record, the initial burden that was cast upon the complainant has been discharged. The writing on the cheque and the signature a-re not in dispute. However, according to the accused, the cheque was given in an unregistered chit transaction.
B. Since the issuance of cheque is not disputed and the accused claims that it was towards some other transaction, the burden is on the accused to prove said transaction and a_1so to prove that there is no outstanding on the cheque. Except making bald statement of cheque being issued in some other transaction, no evidence is produced to substantiate his claim. I do not find any reason to set aside the order of the Iirst appellare Court. 9. However, keeping in view that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act is quasi-criminal in nature and the transaction is of the year 2OO9, nearly 15 yea:-s have passed
I
I
I i
z
J
by, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the sentence of imprisonment of six months and increase the fine component to one lakh. The said fine amount shall be paid by the accused within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Failing, which the accused shaf undergo default sentence of 3 months simple imprisonment.
part.
Sd/. M. RAMANA KRIS A DEPUTY REGIS
//TRUE COPY//
\
SECTION OFFICER
To,
TL *y
HIGH COURT
DATED:05/08/2024
COMMON ORDER
He. STAr
€'
(
D 71 NO\J 2024
o
*
D€,Q p7-.11^,1 tg-O
CRLRC.No.I 537 AND 1635 of 2009
PARTLY ALLOWING BOTH CRIMINAL R.Cs
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act should be set aside in view of the long pendency of the proceedings.
Whether the burden of proof regarding the existence of a loan transaction remains on the accused when the issuance of the cheque is undisputed.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
N.ESWAR RAO
TATIPAMULA RAJU
The State of Andhra Pradesh
K.SURENDER
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
