M/S. Ashish Agencies, Hyd and Anr., Vs M/S. Durga Drugs, Hyd and Anr, Rep Pp.

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY HE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 545 OF 2014

¶7

Appeal under Section 374(4) Cr,P.C. against the Judgment daled 24-04-2014 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1219 of 2012 on the file of the Court of the lll Additional Mekopolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, preferred against the Judgment dated 23-08-2012 in C C.No 237 of 2012 (Old C.C.No.B of 2012) on the file of the Court of the ll Special Magistrate, Hyderabad.

¶8

Between:

¶9

M/s. Ashish Agencies, represented by its Proprietor, Sri Rajender Agarwal, S/o. Jaggannath, aged about 49 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Door No. 4,428713, lnderbagh, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶10

Sri Rajender Agarwal, S/o. Jaggannath, Age:49 years, Occ: Business, Rio. The Legend, 4th Apartment, 2nd Floor, Flat No.202, Street No.2, Himayathnagar Hyderabad.

¶11

...Appellants/Respondents/Al & A2

¶12

AND

¶13

M/s. Durga Drugs, represented by its Manager, Vikas Kumar Gupta, Sio.Subhaschand Gupta, R/o. Gujarati Galli, Suntal Bazar, Hyderabad. ...RespondenUAppellanUComplainant

¶14

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. ...Respondent

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(CRLAMP. NO:811 OF 2014)

¶16

Petition under Section 482 oI Cr.P .C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Judgment made in Crl.A.No.1219 of 2012 daled 24-04-2014 on the file of the court of the lll Additional [Vletropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad,^pending disposal of the criminal appeal.

¶17

Counsel for the Appellants: Sri P. Vinod Lal

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Sri K.V. Raghuveer

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Public Prosecutor

¶20

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶21

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.^{SREENTVAS RAO}

¶22

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.545 oF^201,4

¶23

JUDGMENT:

¶24

the This Criminal Appea-l has been^{liled by} appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2, aggrieved^{by the judgment} passed by' the III Additional Metropolitan St:ssions Judge, Hyderabad, dated 24.04.2014, in Crl.A.No.1219^of2012, reversing the judgment passed by the II Spr-'r:ial^Magistrate, Hyderabad, dated 23.08.2012 in C.C.No 237 ol 2012 whereunder, the appellants/accused Nos. 1 and 2^{were convicted} for the offence under Section 138 of the NegotiaLrle Instruments Act, 188I. Appellalt/accused No. 1 is a frrm, her ce accused No. 1 is sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 5OO0/- in default, accused No.2 being proprietor, has to undergo simple imprirsonment for a period of three months and further accused No 2 is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,5O,OOO/- towards compensatiort.

¶25

I t

¶26

When the matter is taken up for hearing,^{Siri P.Vinod} Lal, learned counsel for the appellants submittec. that during pendency of the appeal, appellant/accused No'2 'ljed in the year, 2016 and accused No.2 is proprietor of accused \o.1 proprietary concerned. By virtue of the death of accused No.2, the appeal has to dismissed as abated.

¶27