APHC010038802024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 500/2024 Between: 1. MODAM CHANDRA SEKHAR, S/O.MODAM OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.6/758, UPSTAIRS, SANKARAPURAM, KADAPA CITY, YSR (KADAPA) DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. P BALA GURAVAIAH, S/O. P.M. GURRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.13/300, CHITARI KONDAPPA VEEDHI, KADAPA CITY, YSR (KADAPA) DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the order dated 02.11.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.l89 of 2020 in Crl.A.No.33 of 2019 on the file of the Hon’ble Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Offences Under S.C/S.T (POA) Act Cases-Cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa, and allow the criminal petition IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including the appearance of the Petitioner in Crl.A.No.33 of 2019 on the file of the Hon’ble Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Offences Under S.C/S.T (POA) Act Cases-Cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition IA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal 2 Petition,the High Court may be pleased pleased to pass extension of interim order dated 05.02.2024 in Crl.P. No.500 of 2024 and pass IA NO: 3 OF 2024 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to pass extension of interim order dated 28.02.2024 in Crl.P. No.500 of 2024 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to pass extension of interim order dated 10.04.2025 in Crl.P. No.500 of 2024 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SHAIK MOHAMMED ISMAIL Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. BANKA NAGESWARA RAO 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 3 ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition is filed by the Petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short „Cr.P.C.‟) for the following relief: “ ... to quash the order dated 02.11.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.l89 of 2020 in Crl.A.No.33 of 2019 on the file of the Hon‟ble Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Offences Under S.C/S.T (POA) Act Cases-Cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa, and allow the criminal petition ...” Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent State and learned counsel for respondent No.1. Perused the material on record. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that respondent No.1/Complainant filed a private complaint against the Petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act which is the subject matter in CC No.222 of 2017 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Kadapa. Vide Judgment dated 06.03.2019, the Trial Court convicted the Petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and shall pay compensation of Rs.16,00,000/- to the complainant, in default, shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Aggrieved thereby, Petitioner preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.33 of 2019 on the file of the Court of Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Offences under SC/ST(PoA) Act cases-cum- IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa. Learned counsel would further submit that in that appeal, Petitioner filed a petition under Section 391 Cr.P.C. to receive documents and mark them on his 4 behalf. The said document is the receipt showing entire payment of due amount to the complainant by the Petitioner. Learned counsel would submit that during his examination before the Trial Court, as D.W.1, the said document is not marked on his behalf. Further, in the suit in OS No.17 of 2019 on the file of the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kadpapa, wherein, the receipt was filed as a document. Learned counsel would submit that the payment receipt is the crux of the matter and the Learned Sessions Judge erroneously dismissed the Petition vide Order dated 02.11.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.189 of 2020, which is impugned in this Criminal Petition on the ground that Petitioner filed photo copy of the receipt, but not the original receipt. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1 would submit that the Criminal Appeal is of the year 2019 and since then, the Petitioner did not chose to place the subject document before the Trial Court. Further, the said document is not a new one and it is within the knowledge of the Petitioner right from pending CC before the Trial Court. Learned counsel would finally prays for dismissal of the petition. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. Considering the submissions and a fair look at the material placed on record, as rightly put by learned counsel for respondent, the fact remains that the subject document(receipt) is not a new document and it is well within the knowledge of the Petitioner. If he intended to file the document, he might have 5 placed on record during pendency of CC before the Trial Court itself. For the reasons best known, Petitioner did not do so. By keeping silent for all these years, in the appeal, petitioner represented that the original of the said document (receipt) is filed in a civil suit which is pending for consideration before the concerned civil court and he intend to file the photocopy of the receipt in this appeal, which is not tenable in the eye of law. For the aforementioned reasons, the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge is a reasoned order and it does not require interference of this Court in this Criminal Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 6 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Criminal Petition No. 500 of 2024 05.11.2025 Mjl /*