In a criminal revision concerning a cheating case based on cheque dishonour, the High Court found no merit in challenging the appellate Court's acquittal of the accused, dismissing the petition and upholding the acquittal.
The Criminal Revision Case is dismissed.
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 STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTHDAYOF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYFOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICEE.V. VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL REVISIO N CASENO: 2631 OF2012
Criminal Revision Case under Sections397 & 401 of Cr'P.C. aggrieved by the Judgment dated 06.11.2012made in Crl.A.No.134 of 2011on the file oi the Court of the(FAC)lllAdditional MetropolitanSessionsJudge' Hyderabad, Preferred againstthe Judgment passedin GC.No'207ot 2010 diteO 03.0e.2011 on the fileofthe Court ofthe XX AdditionalChief Metropolitan Magistrate,Hyderabad.
Between:
P.Ananda Rao, S/o. late SriP.Dharmapuri,Aged about61 years, Occ: Business,R/o' Plot No.28, Road No.5, JubileeHills, Hyderabad.
... Petitioner/RespondenUGomplaiant
AND
...RespondenURespondent
...RespondenUAPPellanUAccused
l.A. NO: 1 OF 201 2(CRLRCMP.NO: 3924 OF 20121
Petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C.prayingthat in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in supportof the petition,the Highcourt maybe pleased to hearthe matter out of turn by fixing an earlydateof hearingof Crl.RC
Counsel for the Petitioner(s):
SRI. V HARI HARAN
Counsel for the Respondents: SRI E.GANESH,ASST. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG)
The Court made the following:
ORDER
.-:7/
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2631 OF 20L2
ORDER:
This Criminal Revision Case is filed seeking to set aside the judgment dated 06.f7.2OI2 in Criminal Appeal No.134 of 20 11 on the fi1e of the learned III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (FAC), Hyderabad (for short, "the appellate Court,,) in reversing the judgment dated 03.03.2011 in C.C.No.2OZ of 2OlO on the file of learned XX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad (for short, "the trial Court,,) arrd consequently confirm the judgment passed by the trial Court.
2
and lent Rs.15,00,000/- to the accused. Out of the said amount Rs.4,00,000/- was paid by way of cash Rs.11,00,000/ r,vas paid by way of cheque. Accused executed a demar-rd promissory note on 10.06.2008 and acknowledged the receipt of consideration and agreed to repay the debt with 5% interest per month Thereafter despite demands for repayment accused did not pay. Finally towards discharge of the liability accused issued a cheque for Rs.B,0O,O00/- and this cheque was drawn on Karur Vysya bank, Ankapa-lli Bralch. Complainant presented the cheque for encashment and the cheque was dishonoured by State Balk of Hyderabad with an endorsement "cheque not issued" thereafter complainant got issued a notice demanding repayment or cheque amount. Accused received the notice but did not repay the money and did not issue any reply. Therefore, thepresent complaint was filed under Section l38 of Negotiable Instruments Act
J
R :. .'.*4<*1t'
,f
payment of compensation, accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months
6 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appellate Court erred in appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record in proper Berspective and acquitted accused. Therefore, seeks to allow the Revision.
7 . Learned Assista:-rt Public Prosecutor contended that the appellate Court after careful scrutiny of the evidence available on record rightly passed the impugned judgment and the interference of this Court is unwarranted. Therefore, seeks to dismiss the Revision.
4
merits and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed
Sd/. N. SRIHARI DEPUTYREGISTRAR
To,
$s'2 SECTIdNOFFICER
//TRUE COPY/'
YJR/PSL
w
HIGH COURT
DATED:1111212024
ORDER
CRLRC.No.2631 o12012
c'r
^il
<br>.:)
r) JUL 2025 z
.L
*
}:,,qTCHl
DIMISSING OF THE CRIMINAL REVISION CASE,
lL_
-K€*^,.1'
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the appellate Court's judgment acquitting the accused in a cheque dishonour case.
Whether the higher Court is justified in dismissing the criminal revision filed under sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
P.Ananda Rao
The State of A.P.
Konathala Sitaram
E. V. Venugopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
