Telangana High Court
CRLP/4990/2010 of K. Venkata Krishna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 29 December 2011
SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.4990 OF 2010 ORDER:- This application is filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to set aside the order dated 17.05.2010 in Crl.M.P.No.2463 of 2010 in C.C.No.340 of
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAOCRIMINAL PETITION No.4990 OF 2010
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:-
This application is filed by the petitioner under Section 482 ofthe Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to set aside theorder dated 17.05.2010 in Crl.M.P.No.2463 of 2010 in C.C.No.340 of2008 on the file of the XV Additional Judge-cum-XIX Additional ChiefMetropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.
A case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Actwas filed on the basis of a cheque, which is said to have been issuedfor a sum of Rs.12,00,000/- by the accused in favour of thecomplainant, who is the petitioner herein.
After the trial, when the matter was coming up for arguments thepetitioner has filed an application to summon the Manager, AndhraBank, Baghamberpet to prove the transactions and also Ex.P-7, whichis account book in favour of the complainant and his son.
The claim of the complainant is that the respondent/ accusedhas disputed about the genuineness of it.
But, however, the Court felt in the cross-examination that theaccused did not dispute the genuineness of Ex.P-7 document nor theentries thereunder.
Evidently, it is not a case where a presumption is to be drawnand the petitioner wants to summon the Bank Manager to prove thenature of the transactions between the accused and the complainant. Though, it can be stated that there is some delay in filing thisapplication, however, in the interest of justice and in view of the factthat huge money is said to have been paid and the cheque has beensaid to have been bounced, an opportunity can be genuinely given to the complainant, which will not prejudice the defence or otherwise ofthe accused. Instead of keeping lacunae when the matter comes forhigher Courts, it is the duty of the Court at the trial stage to give anopportunity to adduce the necessary evidence. Therefore, keeping inview the above circumstances, the order in Crl.M.P.No.2463 of 2010 isset aside and the complainant is permitted to take summons to theManager, Andhra Bank, Baghamberpet to give evidence touching onthe dispute between the parties. Thereafter, the accused onexamination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., should also be given anopportunity to adduce any other evidence if he wants to adduce.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.
Date: 29-12-2011MR
______________________
N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO, J
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO
MR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4990 OF 2010
Date: 29-12-2011