Complainant appealed against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act case concerning repayment of a hand loan by three cheques that were dishonoured. The High Court held the statutory notices were not proved to have been sent to the accused's correct address and dismissed the appeal.
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.
[3251 I
I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 97 OF 2014
Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(4) o'f Cr.P.C., againstthe Judgment dated 30.11.2011passed in CC No.402l2008on the file of the Court of the X Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad Malkajgiri,R.R. District, at lvlalkajgiri.
Between:
M.Narasimha Reddy, S/o Late Sai Reddy occ:Agriculture, R/o Plot No.15,Sai Priya Colony Kapra Municcipality, Keesaralvlandal,R.R.District
...AppellanUComplainant
AND
...Respondent
Counsel for the Appellant : Sri DineshChakravarthy representing Sri Putta Krishna Reddy
Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: SriM. VivekanandaReddyAssistantPublic Prosecutor
The Court delivered the following:
l
I
THE HON'BLE SRI JUS?ICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 97 OF 2014
JTIDGMENT:
This appeal is filed by the appellant/Complainant.questioning the acquittal recorded by the X MetropolitanMagistrate,Cyberabad at Matkajgiri, in C.C.No.4O2 of 2008,dated 30.12.2011.,for the offence under Section 138 of theNegotiableInstruments Act.
i) There is a material alteration of the cheque, and the sameis void' ii) The complainant failed to prove that there u,as any outstanding, and the cheques in question rvere obtained in a different transaction.
{
2
t
iii) Notice was not served on the accused.
iv) The Notice sent was returrred with the endorsement 'not found' and arrother time as hnclaimed'. Accordingly, the address on the envelope is incorrect.
B. There are no grounds to interfere with the well reasoned Judgment of the trial Court.
]_--
SdI. M.MANJULA DEPUTYREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER
To
9/
I
t-
HIGH COURT DATED:05/03/2025
JUDGMENT
CRLA.No.97 ol 201,1
:-
.lr: :i aA?
i J ; rl
t-) 3 0 APn ?0?5
lc. tlI
.'t*
t +
tt Cs PATC $el-
gA
4.1
g-;-4;7ts
DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL
1 issue framed by the court
Whether statutory notice under Section 138 NI Act sent to an incorrect address, returned 'not found' and 'unclaimed', satisfied the requirement for prosecution.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M.Narasimha Reddy
Smt.Y.Nagender Durga
The State of AP., Rep by its Public Prosecutor High Court of AP., Hyderabad
K. Surender
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
