CRLP/2623/2009 of Revoori Sherabesham Vs Chevula Mallesham on 31 December 2010

ORDER:

The petitioner approaches this Court with a prayer to quash the docketorder dated 3.2.2009 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate ofFirst Class (Mobile), Kamareddy, Nizamabad with further direction to issue acheque for a sum of Rs.40,000/- deposited by the first respondent herein in C.C.No. 183 of 1995 in terms of the orders passed by this Court in CriminalRevision Case No. 901 of 2003 dated 9.5.2007.

The petitioner herein filed a private complaint in C.C. No. 183 of 1995against the first respondent herein under Section 138 of NegotiableInstruments Act, on the ground that the cheque issued by the first respondentdated 26.4.1995 for Rs.40,000/- towards repayment of hand loan wasdishonoured by the bank. By order dated 23.12.1999, the learned SpecialJudicial Magistrate of First Class (Mobile), Kamareddy, Nizamabad districtconvicted and sentenced the first respondent to under go simpleimprisonment for a period of five months and to pay a fine of Rs.40,000/-. Against the said order, the firs respondent herein preferred an appeal inCriminal Appeal No. 3 of 2000 and the learned III Additional District andSessions Judge (FTC), Nizamabad by order dated 23.6.2003 confirmed theconviction and sentence passed by the trial Court deleting the fine portionand directing him to pay compensation of Rs.40,000/- to the petitioner withinfour months. In pursuance of the said orders, the first respondent hereindeposited the said amount of Rs.40,000/- before the trial Court and preferred Criminal Revision Case in Crl.R.C. No. 901 of 2003. At that stage the matterbetween the parties has been compromised and this Court passed ordersdated 9.5.2007 in Crl.M.P.No. 980 of 2007 in Crl.R.C.No.901 of 2003, whichreads as under; “Learned counsel for the respondent says no objection.

Since no specific order has been passed with regard topayment of compensation, it is made clear that thepetitioner/complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.40,000/- (fortythousand only ) which was deposited towards compensation. This petition is accordingly ordered.”

In pursuance to the above orders, the petitioner herein filed a petitionbefore the trial Court under Rules 230, 232 to 235 of Civil Rules of Practice toissue a cheque for a sum of Rs.40,000/-. The said petition was returned onthe ground that that records in Crl.R.C. No. 901 of 2003 from the High Courtof A.P. were not received. Questioning the said order, the present criminalpetition is filed.

Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned PublicProsecutor.

This Court by order dated 22.4.2009 called for a report from the trialCourt as regards receipt of documents in Crl.R.C No. 901 of 2003 which weredispatched by registered parcel No. 5596 dated 4.5.2007.

As evident from the record, the report so called for, is not yet received. The matter is pending before this Court from April,2009 onwards and havingheard the counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that instead of waiting for tracing of the records, in view of the orders passed by this Court inCrl.R.C.No.901 of 2003 dated 9.5.2007, the trial Court is directed to verify theFine Receipts Register before it and if any such amount is deposited by thefirst respondent herein, the learned Special Judicial magistrate of First Class(Mobile), Kamareddy, after getting an affidavit from the petitionerherein/complainant, return the said amount as compensation.

With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

DATE: 31.12.2010TVK

______________

RAJA ELANGO,J

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

CRL.PETITION No. 2623 OF 2009DATE: 31.12.2010