Telangana High Court

M/S.Kiran Impex Private Limited vs The State Of Telangana on 29 November, 2022

Bench: G.Radha Rani

                                       1
                                                                           Dr.GRR, J
                                                                    crlrc_3513_2018

             THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI


              CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.3513 of 2018


ORDER:

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner-complainant

aggrieved by the Order dated 23.11.2018 in Cri.M.P.No.1106 of 2018 in

C.C.No.368 of 2013 on the file of Special Magistrate Court No.1, Kukatpally at

Prasanth Nagar.

2. The case of the petitioner-complainant was that he filed a case against the

respondent Nos. 2 and 3-accused Nos. 1 and 2 for the offence under Section 138

of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'NI Act') in C.C.No.368 of 2013 on the

file of Special Magistrate Court No.1, Kukatpally at Prasanth Nagar and the

same ended in conviction on 11.11.2013. The respondent Nos.2 and 3-accused

Nos. 1 and 2 filed Criminal Appeal No. 715 of 2013 on the file of XV

Additional District Judge, Rangareddy District and the same was dismissed on

10.04.2018 confirming the judgment passed by the trial court.

3. Aggrieved by the said dismissal, the respondents-accused filed

Crl.R.C.No.1119 of 2018 and the same was pending before this Court. While

so, by an Order dated 01.10.2018 in I.A.No.5 of 2018 in Crl.R.C.No.1119 of

2018, this Court permitted the petitioner-complainant to withdraw a sum of

Dr.GRR, J crlrc_3513_2018

Rs.25,00,000/- deposited before the trial court towards fine amount without

furnishing any security. But the trial court observing that the amount of

Rs.25,00,000/- deposited before it, was neither compensation nor fine, but, it

was only a cash security deposited by the respondents, not permitted the

petitioner-complainant to withdraw the said amount.

4. Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner-complainant preferred this

revision contending that the trial court exceeded in its jurisdiction vested in it

while dismissing the application filed for withdrawal of the amount pursuant to

the direction of this Court dated 01.10.2018 and committed grave error.

5. The court below instead of ordering the said petition as prayed, had

drawn unreasonable conclusions which were contrary to the record and prayed

to set aside the order dated 23.11.2018 in Crl.M.P.No.1106 of 2018 in

C.C.No.368 of 2013 on the file of Special Magistrate Court No.1, Kukatpally.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. Perused the record.

8. The record would disclose that the accused Nos. 2 and 3 were convicted

in C.C.No.368 of 2013 on 11.11.2013 and they were sentenced to imprisonment

for two (02) years for the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act and directed

to pay a sum of Rs.4,61,17,430/- by any one or all of them within one month

from the date of the judgment.

Dr.GRR, J crlrc_3513_2018

9. The accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.715 of 2013 and filed

Cri.M.P.No.702 of 2013 before the court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge,

Cyberabad, Rangareddy District seeking suspension of sentence during the

pendency of the appeal. The appellate court vide Order dated 19.11.2013

allowed the said petition and suspended the sentence on the same terms and

conditions imposed by the trial court and further directed the appellant-accused

to deposit Rs.25,00,000/- in trial court on or before 18.01.2014. The accused

persons without depositing the said amount filed Crl.M.P.No.33 of 2014,

seeking extension of time. The time was extended up to 20th February, 2014.

10. Subsequently, the accused filed a petition for modification of the Order

dated 20.01.2014 praying to receive the amount of Rs.25,00,000/- by way of

Demand Draft and the said petition was allowed and the accused-convicts

deposited Demand Draft for Rs.25,00,000/- before the trial court on 14.10.2014.

Subsequently, the lower appellate court confirmed the sentence imposed by the

trial court by dismissing the appeal in Criminal Appeal No.715 of 2013 vide

judgment dated 10.04.2018.

11. Aggrieved by the said judgment of the appellate court, the convicts-

accused preferred Criminal Revision Case No.1119 of 2018. They also filed

I.A.No.1 of 2018 seeking suspension of sentence and to enlarge them on bail.

This Court vide order dated 27.04.2018 suspended the sentence confirmed by

the lower appellate court subject to the revision petitioners executing a personal

Dr.GRR, J crlrc_3513_2018

bond each for Rs.50,000/- with two (02) sureties for the like-sum. It was also

ordered that the petitioners had to deposit a sum of Rs.1,75,00,000/- to the

credit of C.C.No.368 of 2013 within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of

the Order i.e., 27.04.2018, failing which the suspension order would stand

revoked. The revision petitioners not deposited the said amount within the time

stipulated by this Court. As such, they were committed to jail on execution of

NBWs on 10.10.2018. Subsequently, I.A.No.5 of 2018 was filed by the

complainant to permit him to withdraw the amount of Rs.25,00,000/- deposited

by the respondent-accused in C.C.No.368 of 2013. The said petition was

allowed by this Court on 01.10.2018 observing that:

"Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-complainant and perused the record."

"This application is filed seeking permission of the Court to withdraw an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- deposited by the respondent-accused in C.C.No.368 of 2013 on the file of the I Special Magistrate, Kukatpally, Cyberabad District."

"Learned Counsel for the petitioner-complainant submits that an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- was deposited 15.02.2014 in C.C.No.368 of 2013 on the file of I Special Magistrate, Kukatpally, Cyberabad District, towards the amount".

"The subject dispute relates to the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The respondent-accused is avoiding the arrest. There is default on his part in depositing the fine amount in terms of the order of this Court."

"Without prejudice to the rights of the respondent-accused, the petitioner- complainant is permitted to withdraw an amount of Rs.25,00,000/-, without furnishing any security, deposited in C.C.No.368 of 2013 on the file of the learned I Special Magistrate, Kukatpally, Cyberabad District."

Dr.GRR, J crlrc_3513_2018

12. The trial court observing that:

"Therefore the amount of Rs.25,00,000/- deposited is only a cash security amount as there were no sureties furnished while suspending the sentence by the appellate court, as they have not got the sentence suspended by this Court by furnishing any sureties at the time of their conviction before this Court on 11.11.2013."

"In view of the foregoing discussion and the perusal of the record and the contents of the affidavit filed by the petitioner in this petition, it shows that the amount of Rs.25,00,000/- deposited in this Court is neither compensation amount nor any fine amount and it is only a cash security amount deposited by the respondents as per the orders of the appellate court by its Order dated 19.11.2013 while suspending the sentence imposed by this Court on 11.11.2013. Therefore this Court is not inclined to permit the petitioner-complainant either to withdraw the said amount or to get transfer the same to the account of petitioner-complainant by RTGS in the absence of specific Orders of the Hon'ble High Court, or without getting no objection certificate from the respondent-accused to permit the petitioner- complainant to withdraw the same without causing any prejudice to the respondent-accused and without furnishing any surety."