C. ANANDA REDDY Vs. S. JAYARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The petitioner was the accused before the court below, against whom proceedings were initiated by the respondent for an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'NI Act', for brevity).

(2.) It transpires that on 20.12.2006, the petitioner and the respondent had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding, pursuant to which, the petitioner had issued a cheque. It transpires that there was a difference of opinion between the petitioner and the respondent and the petitioner was under pressure to succumb to the demands of the respondent and was compelled to issue the cheque as protection money to live in peace, for otherwise, it was threatened that the petitioner's existence would be made difficult in the area, where he had purchased the house. It then transpires that the cheque had been presented for encashment by the respondent and was dishonoured. It is in that background that a legal notice is said to have been issued, but which was never served on the present petitioner. However, the respondent filed a private complaint on 29.5.2007 and it was beyond the time prescribed under the NI Act. The complaint was not accompanied with any application seeking condonation of delay, which is provided for under the proviso to Sec. 142 of the NI Act.

(3.) This court, while taking note of the judgment of the Supreme Court, in case of Pavan Kumar Ralli Vs. Maninder Singh, AIR 2014 SC 3512 , had admitted the matter and had granted stay of further proceedings of the matter before the court below. It is thereafter that the present petition is posted before this court for hearing, a full 7 years after it was admitted and stay order was granted.