MANDADI RAM REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 27-6-2002 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Miryalguda in Crl. M.P. No. 2650 of 2002 in C.C. No. 667 of 1998.

(2.) The petitioners are the accused in C.C. No. 667 of 1998 filed by the 2nd respondent herein for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. They filed Crl. M.P. No. 2650 of 2002 under Section 258 of Code of Criminal Procedure to stop further proceedings in the case and to discharge them. That application having been dismissed under the impugned order, they are now assailing the same.

(3.) It is averred inter alia in the petition filed by them that the 2nd respondent and one Kandula Venkat Reddy sold the land covered by Sy. Nos. 704, 706, 800, 804, 797, 798, 710 and 711 situate at Damarcharla village measuring Ac. 0-15 guntas at the rate of Rs. 3,75,000/- per acre and executed an agreement of sale dated 10-11-1997 and received on various occasions the amounts towards part payment aggregating to Rs. 10,00,000/-. When the 2nd respondent and the said Kandula Venkata Reddy were insisting the petitioners for payment of the balance, the petitioners issued four cheques each dated 15-7-1998 for a total amount of Rs. 6,67,000/- drawn on Syndicate Bank, Miryalguda Branch. The petitioners, on verification by obtaining a certified copy of the pahani patrika from the revenue department, came to know that the 2nd respondent and the said Kandula Venkata Reddy had no title over the land sought to be sold under the agreement referred to above. Having realised that the 2nd respondent and another had no title, they immediately issued a letter to the Branch Manager, Syndicate Bank requesting him to stop payments under the four cheques issued by them. The petitioners also filed a complaint before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Miryalguda against the 2nd respondent and Kandula Venkat Reddy for the offence of cheating and the same having been forwarded to the Station House Officer Miryalguda, he registered the crime, investigated into it and eventually field a final report stating that the matter was of civil nature. The petitioners therefore filed a private complaint under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the 2nd respondent and another. Under the above circumstances the 2nd respondent and another were not entitled to question the act of the petitioners and demand payment of money towards the balance sale consideration.