v~» IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI THURSDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 553 OF 2023 Appeal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C, aganist the order dated 21- 04-2023 passed in S.T.C. No. 1586 of 2022, on the file of the III Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Gujuwaka. Between: Pethakamsetty Vani, W/o Vasubabu, Hindu, aged 37 years, residing at D.No.63-5- 364/1 Visakhapatnam. Indira Colony-2, Sriharipuram, Malkapuram Post, ...Appellant/Complainant AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. 2. Sangada Venkata Laxmi, W/o Prasad, D/o B.Tatha Rao, Hindu, aged about 36 years, residing at D.No.63-5-303/3, Indira Colony-2, Malkapuram, Visakhapatnam-11. ...2"'^ Respondent/Accused Counsel for the Appellant : Sri Simhachalam Karukola Counsel for Respondent No.1 : Ms K Priyanka Lakshmi Assistant Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: 1 Xr APHC010353032023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] .1^' THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE Js. -.^.0 - * PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 553/2023 Between; Pethakamsetty Vani ...APELLANT AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPODENT{S) Counsel for the Apellant: 1.SIMHACHALAM KARUKOLA Counsel for the Respodent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 553/2n?.? JUDGMENT: This Criminal Appeal is filed aggrieved by the judgment dated 21.04.2023 passed in S.T.C.No.1586 of 2022 on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Gajuwaka. 2. Heard Sri K. Simhachalam, learned counsel for the Appellant and K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State is in attendance. Notice is served on the respondent No.2, appeared. Ms. none 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the herein is the complainant before the Trial Court in S.T.C.No.1586 of 2022 i on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Gajuwaka complainant filed a private complaint before the Trial Court respondent No.2/Accused for the offence punishable under Section N.I.Act. The complaint was dismissed for non prosecution. appellant i.e.. The against the 138 of 4. For the better understanding, the judgment passed by the learned Trial Judge is extracted hereunder: “01. This is a complaint filed to punish the U/sec.138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and to punish the accused for the said offence as per law and pass appropriate orders against the accused directing to Rs. 10,00,000/- i.e., double the said amount covered under the cheque as fine and the same may be awarded to the accused pay 3 complainant as compensation as per sec.138 Nl Act and under sec.357 of Cr.P.C., 02. Complainant called absent, no representation, no process paid for NBW, hence the complaint is dismissed under sec.256 Cr.P.C., ” 5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the complainant is very much ready to prosecute his matter. On the given day, she could not appear before the Court and that her absence on that particular day is not willful or deliberate. The appellant is diligent in prosecuting her case. Learned counsel finally submits that an opportunity may be given to the appellant to workout her remedy before the Trial Court. Considering the submissions made and a perusal of the impugned judgment passed by the learned Trial Judge, the complainant failed to appear before the Courtand the complaint was dismissed for non prosecution. But the Crder is bereft of any details as to the purpose for which the matter is posted on that particular day and the reason for calling of the complainant and the 6. reason as to why the presence of the complainant is required on that day. Therefore, in absence of any such reasons, the impugned order is not tenable under law. 7. In the light of the aforementioned premises, the impugned order is set aside. The appeal is allowed. The matter is remanded to the Trial Court for a fresh consideration. Learned Trial Judge is requested to proceed with the 4 ^5- matter and dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible without granting any adjournment in a casual way on mere asking. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR closed. SD/- //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER Court, Gujuwaka, To, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate 1. The III Additional Visakhapatnam, 2. OneCCto 3. TwoCCstothe Amaravathi [OUT] 4, The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Visakhapatnam district Karukola Advocate [OPUC] Court of Andhra Pradesh at Sri. Simhachalam Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi 5. three CD COPIES Stu TAC HIGH COURT DATED:06/03/2025 JUDGMENT CRLA.No.553 of 2023 t IS MAY-2025 Current Section Sg^espATCW^^ 09, 1. ALLOWING THE APPEAL