The High Court · 2025

1 . The state of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High court of L.. r{^ rrrana, . 2. M/s. Jeevan Jvoini rtainerals, A partnership Firm, Rep. by its_Managing Telangana, at Hyderabad' partner, Mr. G. Kshira Sagar. 6-l-za,2nd Floor, sri tliarri Nilayam Road No' 3, Bhagyalaxmi Colony, Manikonda 500089' ...ResPondents/comPlainant PetitionunderSection52SofBNSSprayinothatinthecircumstances stated in the ru"*oi"naum of Grounds ot criminaipiition, the High court may be -src (Nl) No. 178 of 2023, on the file of the pleased to quasn'tne [ro"""oing, in il Additionar Junior civir Judg"-"u*-xtil Additionar Metroporitan Magistrate at Raiendranagar. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 PetitionunderSection-S2SolBNSSprayllgthatinthecircumstances stated in the rrr"*il"noum ot Grouni, .i cr*in_"r-p"iition, the High c-ourt may be oreased to stav of all furtht' qp9"giil; il sii 1ryf ot zozs' on the file of the , Additionrr'j*i"i'6ili Jud;;ilr*i Adaitil""r Metropolitan Masistrate at Rajendranagar' This Petition coming on for hearing' upon perusing the Mem' ,Advocate tor tne petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Vleeramalla' Additional Public GroundsotcriminalPetitionanduponhearingtheargumentsofSriPChaithanya orandum of "'tie r'r; ProsecutoronbehalfofRespondentNo.landnoneappearedfortheRespondent No.2. The Gourt made the tollowing: ORDER IN THE ]TIIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OT' TELANGANA AT HYDERABAI) THE HCINOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.167OS of 2025 Date: L5.L2.2O25 Betweerr B.Sreer.ivasa Reddy AND ...Petitioner The Slete of Telangana, Repres,ented by public prosecutor, High C)ourt, Hyderabad and another. . . . Respondents ORDER 'lhis Criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in STc (NI) No. L7g of 2023, on the fire of the II Additional Junior civil Judge-cum_XIII Additio,ar Metrrpolitan Magistrate at Rqjendranagar, wherein the petitl'oner was arrayed as sore accused, for the offences punishable under section 13g of Negotiabre Instruments (N.r.) Act, I BBl r/w Section 142 offthe N.I. Act. , t I i t I i ..)..

2. Heard Mr.P.chaithanya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for: respondent No. l-state.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and the respondent No.2 filed a complaint by making false allegations against the petitioner. It is contended that there is no legally enforceable debt for the huge amount of Rs.SO lakhs between the parties. He further submitted that the respondent No.2 forged and fabricated the cheques and, on the basis thereof, filed the present cornplaint. It is further' contended that the essential 4. ingredients of the offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments (N.I.) Act, 1881 r/w Section 142 of the N.I. Act do not attract and the only amount due and payable by the petitioner is only Rs' 4 to 5 lakhs and not Rs.SO lakhs as alleged by the respond.ent No.2. He further qubmitted that the petitioner's wife had already 3 executed a sale deed in favour of respondent No.2 and therefore, no legally enforceable debt or liability subsists between the parties. Hence, the continuation of proceedings against him would be a clear abuse of process of law.

5. Leerrned Additional public prosecutor had not opposed the same.

6. Herving considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the mztterial available on record, it reveals that the respon'lent No.2, after comprying with the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 13g of Negotiable Inst*rrnents Act issued a regal notice and filed a private compliant invoking the provisions of Sections 19o and 2oo ol' code of criminar procedure (cr.p.c.) against the petitioner. The learned Magistrate after recording the sworn statement of respondent No.2, took cognizance of the oflbnce and issued summons. ::4:: 7 ' Ins.far as the contentions raised by the learned counser for the petitioner that the cheques were forged and fabricated one and the petitioner is not due to pay the huge amount of Rs.SO lakhs as claimed by the respondent No.2 are concerned, the seLme are disputed questions of f,acts. This court is of the considered view that the such issues has to be adjudicated by the Trial Court after a full_fledged trial as to whether the petitioner is due of amount of Rs.SO Iakhs or only a minor amount. The same cannot be adjudicated and tested while exercising the power as conferreo ,ro., Segtion 52g of Bharatrya Nagarik suraksha sanhitha, 2023' Accordingly, this court do not find any ground to quash the proceedings- Thus, this criminal petition is dismissed 8 During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Government Employee working in Irrigation Department. Taking intol6hsiaeration the above said fact, the ( I presence clf the petition erf accused in STC (NI) No'178 ot 2023,oothefileofthellAdditionalJuniorCivilJudge- cum-XIII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Rajend'r a):Lagar ' is dispensed with' subject to the condition that he shall be represented through his counsel on each and every date of hearing' If the of the Petitioner 1s required, he shall aPpear presenc€) . In case of his non-appea:rance before the trial Court' the sPt:cific date fixed by the trial Court for his the trial Court is entitled to proceed with appea-r€mce, the ma1-ter, in accord'ance with law' g.' However, it is made clear that the observations and reasonsrecordedinthepresentord'ershallnotaffectthe findinE;sordisposalofthecriminalcase'Thelearned Magist.rate is directed' to decide the matter on the basis of the evid,ence which are going to be adduced by the partiers, uninfluenced by any of the observations made in the present criminal Petition. { I I I I I t I I i i i I i , ::6:: 1O. With the above said directions, this criminal petition is disPosed of. Miscellaneous applications. pending if any' shall stand closed SD/- P PONNA KRISHNA, REGISTRAR. ,,TRUE COPY// OFFICER " To,

1. The ll Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Xlll Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Rajendranagar

2. tw6 CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (OUT)

3. One CC to SRI P CHAITHANYA, Advocate TOPUCI 4. Two CD Copies ADKfr HIGH COURT DATED i1511212025 .e ORDER CRLP.No.167 5 of 2025 I lnF ra c C) C)t 2 I Jrt'| 2026 t ;) * i) DISPOSING OF THE CRLP *Sd X@