Telangana High Court
Smt. Amirishetty Neelima vs M/S. Reliance Commercial Finance ... on 6 February, 2023
Bench: K.Surender
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3022 OF 2020
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), is filed seeking to
quash the proceedings in C.C.No.12916 of 2022 pending on the file
of XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, against the petitioner -
accused in the said case. The offence alleged against her is under
Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'N.I. Act').
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the record.
3. The only ground on which the petitioner is seeking quashing of
the proceedings is that the cheque does not belong to her and she
has not signed on the cheque. However, she is being prosecuted for
the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act, which is not maintainable.
4. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent - complainant would
submit that according to them the cheque was signed by the
petitioner herein and also the cheque was drawn on the account
maintained by the petitioner. For the said reasons, the said aspects
can be ascertained during the course of trial.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that on a glance of
the cheque would reveal that the signature is not that of this
petitioner and for the said reason, in view of the judgment of this
Court in Criminal Petition No.4000 of 2019, the proceedings have to
be quashed.
6. In Criminal Petition No.4000 of 2019, the petitioner therein
was being prosecuted for the reason of being a joint account holder.
However, this cheque was not signed by the petitioner. In the said
circumstances, this Court deemed it appropriate to quash the
proceedings for the reason of the petitioner not being a signatory,
but only being a co-account holder.
7. As seen from the cheque, this Court cannot come to a
conclusion that the cheque was not signed by the petitioner herein.
It is open for the petitioner to examine the Branch Manager of Bank
or any other competent employee of the said branch to ascertain
who is the holder of the said account, against which said cheque was
issued.
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed, directing the
parties to go ahead with the trial.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court to
dispense with the personal appearance of petitioner - accused before
the court below on each and every date of adjournment.
10. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to dispense with the attendance of
the petitioner - accused in C.C.No.12916 of 2022 pending on the file
of XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, when represented by her
counsel on record. The attendance of the petitioner is dispensed
with subject to filing an affidavit by her stating that in her absence
the proceedings conducted by her counsel will not be disputed by
her in any manner and also she shall not dispute her identity.
However, the petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate
as and when her presence is required. In the event of the
petitioner failure to appear when the Court directs, this order
dispensing their attendance would stand cancelled.
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending, shall also stand
closed.
_________________
K. SURENDER, J
Date: 06.02.2023
rev
