Disposed

Sri Kailaswar Ajay v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Nov 2025CRLP/2743/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused sought quashing of a cheque dishonour complaint, contending he had nearly repaid the debt and was insolvent. Without examining merits, the High Court disposed of the petition granting liberty to seek discharge before the trial Court, which must decide within three months.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file discharge application before trial Court; trial Court directed to decide preferably within three months.

Sri Kailaswar Ajay Vs The State of Telangana — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^329e ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD} I\NONDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{E.V.VENUGOPAL} CRIMINAL PETITION NO:^{2743OF 2025}

¶5

Between:

¶6

Sri Kailaswar Ajay, Sio. Sri^{Dayakar Kailaswaraged about 44 years,Occ'} business R/o. Flat No.211,^{Koratla Palace 2-2-11661A,TilaknagarNew} Nallakunta, Hyderabad - 500044.

¶7

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶8

AND

¶9

The State of Telangana, Represented^{by PublicProsecutor High Court'} HYderabad

¶10

RESP.NDENT

¶11

Sri Thota Thirupathaiah,^{S/o. Sri Ramaiah, aged about 54 yearsOcc.} business, R/o H.No.3-407/38-8^{Hi-tech City Colony, [Vlancherial- 504208} ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶12

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023^{praying that inthe} circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition,the} High Court may be pleased to pass an order^quashrng the^complaintin STC.Nl.No.168/2024 on the file of the ll^{AdditionalJudicial FirstClass} Magistrate, at Mancherial,^{against the petitroner/ accused, as illegal, violative of} taw-and Section 138 of the^{Negotiable lnstrumentsAct,1881, in the interestof} justice;

¶13

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025

¶14

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 PraYing that in^the circumstances stated in the^{Memorandumof Grounds of CriminalPetition,the} High court may be^{pleasedTo passan order stayingall further proceedingsin} th6 case in STC^{NLNo. 1OB|2O24on the file of ll AdditionalJudicial First Class} Magistrate, at Mancherial,^{including appearanceof the petitioner/accused,;} This Petition coming on for^{hearing,upon perusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of criminal^{Petitionand upon hearing the argumentsof sri SHYAMS} AGRAWAL, Advocate for the^{Petitionerand Smt Madhavi,AsstPublic} Prosecutor on behalf of the^{RespondentNo. 1 and Sri Kondadi AjayKumar,} Advocate for the Respondent^No.2; The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶15

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.'v ENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION No.2743 ot 2o.25

¶16

ORDER:

¶17

This Criminal petition is filed under Se: ion 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 202.i (for short "BNSS") by the petitioner/ accused, seeking to cluzrsh the proceedings in S.T.C. NI. No.16g of 2024, cnt rhe file of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistra t : oi First Class, Mancherial, for the offences under Sec.t on I3g of Negotiable Insutruments Act, lgB 1 (for shr,; t ,,15" p1 Act").

¶18

Heard Sri Shyam S.Agarwal, learned co, nsel for the petitioner ernd Ms.Madhavi, learned Assis; ant public Prosecutor for respondent No. 1_State. l) :rused the materials on record.

¶19

Brief facts leading to filing of this crimina retition are that in view of the acquaintance with the c < mplainant, accused approached him and advanced halcl l: rn amount of Rs.1O,OO,00O/- with a promise to pay the sanre with interest @ 2Vo per month and executed a pronr ssory note

¶20

¶21

on 09.03.2022. Till February,^{2024, accused paid an} amount of Rs.8,37,709/-. During repayment,^accused advanced Rs.20,OO,00O I ^nd issued^{promissory note on} 72.03.2024 promising to repay the amount^{with interest} 2o/o per month. But the accused^{did not repay the same.} When the complainalt demalded to pay the amount,^the accused issued a cheque bearing No.053042,^dated 24.O2.2O24 for an amount of Rs.10,00,000/-.^Whenthe complainalt presented the said cheque, it^{was returned} with an endorsement "fund insufficient"- Then,^the complainant issued a statutory notice to the^{accused on} 17.O5.2O24, but the accused did not^give any reply to^the said notice. Therefore, the accused committed the^offence under Section 138 of NI Act.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has paid almost entire amount to^the complainant; hence, there is no legally enforceable^debt and liability on the part of the accused^{towards the} complainant. The complainant issued^{lega1notice to the} address belongs to the mother of the^{accused and the}

¶23

¶24

notice was returned to the sender. In view of he accused becoming insolvent having lost money by pr ying hear,y amount of interest to the creditors, he appr rached the learned Additional Judge, City Small Ca'-,r ses Court, Hyderabad and filed insolvency petition uide .P.No.23 of 2024. Therefore, none of the ingredients lev,: led against the petitioner would attract and the prima-faci: case does not constitute against the petitioner to undr,r go him for tria,l and continuation of proceedings against t : : petitioner would amount to abuse of process of law. Herr :e, seeks to allow this criminal petition

¶25

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 rv: rld submit that there are serious allegations against the pi: itioner and the fulfledged trial alone shall elicit the truth r L this case, therefore, interfbrence of this Court at thi; stage 1S unwarranted. Hence, seeks to dismiss t I : criminal petition.

¶26

Taking the same stand, learned Assislant Pubiic Prosecutor submitted that unless the trial is conducted, the factum of the compliant or uice uersa carnot be

¶27

¶28

established and therefore, seeks to dismiss this criminal peti tion

¶29

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2 ald learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, this Court without making any observation on merits or demerits of the case, deems it appropriate to disposed of this criminal petition granting Iiberty to the petitioner to file appropriate application in accordalce with law, before the trial Court seeking discharge, and upon filing the same, the trial court shal consider the said application on merits and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible preferablv within a period of three (03) months thereon.

¶30

8 Accordingly, this criminal petition is disposed of

¶31

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall

¶32

also stand closed.

¶33

SD/-T.SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

The ll Addl. Judicial First Class^{Magrstrate, Mancherial} 2 One CC to SRI SHYAM^{S AGRAWAL Advocate} [OPUC]

¶39

One CC to SRl. KONDADI^{AJAY KUr\4ARAdvocate} [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,^{High Court at Hyderabad (OUT)} 5. Two CD Copies

VSM/PSL Y*-

HIGH COURT

DATED:0311112025

/1'
/1" ',''
,t ;,
l!r i, f.,ffi
\aa.,
'-

¶44

ORDER

¶45

CRLP.No.2743 of 2025

¶46

DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION

¶47

I co@
V-
<^{nf

Sri Kailaswar Ajay v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Kailaswar Ajay 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jakkula Mallesh Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Pujari Venugopal Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Mucherla Padmakar Rao Vs State of Telangana

Ganta Linganna Vs The State of Telangana

Lingala Tirupathi Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.S.Uma Vs The State of Telangana