Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Apex Meadows Pvt Ltd vs G.R. Consulting on 19 September, 2024
APHC010375372023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3396]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 685/2023
Between:
APEX MEADOWS PVT LTD, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
COMPANIES ACT, 1956 REG OFFICE AT 501, DLF PLACE- OFFICE
BLOCK, A4 DISTRICT CENTER, SAKETH, NEW DELHI-1 10017 AND
ALSO HAVING ITS BRANCH AT SY.NO.104/2, OPPOSITE SBT
HOTEL, NH-5, GAJUWAKA, VISHAKHAPATNAM. REP BY ITS
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. MONISH ROW, S/O LATE A.V.N.
JAGGA ROW, AGED 60 YRS, R/O DEEPANJALI APARTMENTS NEAR
GOVERNOR'S BUNGLOW, VISHAKHAPATNAM
...APELLANT
AND
1. G R CONSULTING, A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN SITUATED AT
74, SHANKARA ARCADE, VANIVALAS ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI,
BENGALURU- 560004, REP BY ITS CHIEF/SOLE PROPRIETOR MR.
GIRISH RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN TO APPELLANT.
2. MR GIRISH RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN TO APPELLANT, AGED ABOUT
57 YEARS, SOLE PROPRIETOR, GR CONSULTING, 74, SHANKARA
ARCADE, VANIVALAS ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU-
560004.
3. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH
COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH.
4. MR GIRISH RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN TO APPELLANT, AGED ABOUT
57 YEARS, SOLE PROPRIETOR, GR CONSULTING, 74, SHANKARA
ARCADE, VANIVALAS ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU-
560004. .
...RESPODENT(S):
Counsel for the Appellant:
1. M/S INDUS LAW FIRM
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. VARUN BYREDDY
2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
2
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:
Impugning the Order dated 11.05.2023 passed in DDR No.1296 of 2020
on the file of the Court of III Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Gajuwaka,
Visakhapatnam, the Appellant / Complainant preferred the present appeal.
2. Sri L.Sai Manoj Kumar, learned counsel representing M/s.Indus Law
Firm for the Appellant and Sri Varun Byreddy, learned counsel for
Respondents 1 and 2. Ms.K.Prayanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public
Prosecutor is in attendance.
3. It is a case where the Appellant/Complainant filed a private complaint
under Section 200 Cr.P.C for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against Respondent Nos.1 and 2. The
office had taken come objections before registering the case on the file of
Court of III Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam.
The Appellant/Complainant had complied with such objections and in the
second spell, the office had taken some more objections. When it was coming
up for hearing at the Bench on judicial side, the Appellant / Complainant could
not be present and there was no representation on his behalf. Hence, the
complaint was dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the Appellant would submit that their absence, on
the given day, was not deliberate, but they could not appear due to persons
reasons. Learned counsel would further submit that the subject cheque is for
Rs.15 lakhs and an opportunity may be given to the Appellant to pursue his
complaint.
5. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 would submit that Court
may pass appropriate orders, since the complaint was dismissed at the
numbering stage.
6. Considering the submissions, in the interests of justice, the Appeal is
allowed setting aside the Order dated 11.05.2023 passed in DDR No.1296 of
2020 on the file of the Court of III Additional Metropolitan Magistrate,
Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam. The matter is remanded to the trial Court and
DDR No.1296 of 2020 is restored to the file. The Appellant / Complainant
shall appear before the trial Court on 27.09.2024 and comply with the
objections. The learned trial Judge is requested to proceed with the matter
according to law.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________________
JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Date:19.09.2024
Dinesh
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Dt.19.09.2024
Dinesh
