APHC010117602024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1573/2024 Between: Peram Anitha ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. Y RATNA PRABHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the present criminal petition seeking quash of STC.No.5 of 2022 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Lakkireddipalli. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent has filed a complaint before the Court without complying 2 with the statutory requirement of Section 138 of N.I. Act. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent has not served the legal notice and with an ulterior motive has purposefully not mentioned the pincode of the petitioner correctly on the legal notice addressed to the petitioner. Reliance is placed on the copy of the returned legal notice dated 25.01.2022. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is residing at Rajendra Nagar, Telangana State with pincode 500089. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent has evidently sent the legal notice by mentioning the pincode 500001 and got the legal notice sent to the wrong pincode. It is submitted that as per the statutory requirement under Section 138 of N.I. Act is not complied with, the Magistrate ought not to have taken cognizance of the case and register it as STC. It is submitted that on account of the petitioner not being aware of the legal notice issued under Section 138 of N.I. Act, there was no occasion for the petitioner to comply with the requirement of repayment of the cheque amount within fifteen days from the date of receipt of notice, and as such prays for quashing the complaint. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the legal notice was addressed to the proper address and the pincode referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the postal receipt refers to pincode of Hyderabad GPO which is 500001. It is also submitted that the return postal cover would also indicate that the legal notice was addressed to the proper address along with appropriate pincode. 3 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent, this Court finds no grounds to interfere and without giving a finding on the validity of the legal notice sent by the petitioner, it is left open for the petitioner to raise all the grounds before the trial Court, when the matter is taken up for trial. 6. With these observations, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. 7. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N BMS