MUMMAREDDY VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. PENDYALA RAMAKRISHNA CHOWDARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision case is directed against the order dated 24.9.2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 252 of 2012 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, East Godavari District, at Rajahmundry, whereby and whereunder, the learned Principal Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment dated 2.1.2012 passed in CC No. 346 of 2011 on the file of VI Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry. The petitioner is the complainant and the 1st respondent is the accused in CC No. 346 of 2011. The complainant filed complaint against the accused alleging inter alia that the accused borrowed an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 2.5.2009 for his family expenses and executed a demand promissory note in his favour. The accused issued a cheque bearing No. 919749 dated 6.4.2011 drawn on Indian Bank, Rajahmundry Branch for Rs. 1,25,000/- towards discharge of his liability under the pronote dated 2.5.2009. The complainant presented the cheque on 6.4.2011 and it came to be dishonoured on the ground of insufficient funds. The complainant issued a statutory notice under Section 138 of the N.I. Act calling upon the accused to pay the amount covered under the cheque in question. The accused received the notice on 3.5.2011, but he did not choose to pay the amount covered under the cheque in question. Therefore, the accused is liable for punishment under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) The learned VI Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry took the complaint on file as CC No. 346 of 2011. The CC stood posted for representing the process for execution of the N.B.W. against the accused. The complainant failed to be present and thereby, the learned VI Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry proceeded to dismiss the complaint, by judgment dated 2.1.2012. Assailing the judgment dated 2.1.2012 passed in CC No. 346 of 2011; the complainant filed Criminal Appeal No. 252 of 2012. The learned Principal Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry, on hearing the Counsel appearing for the appellant and on considering the material brought on record, proceeded to dismiss the appeal, by judgment dated 24.9.2012. Hence this criminal revision case.

(3.) Notice to the 1st respondent came to be ordered on 29.11.2012. Despite notice being served, the 1st respondent/accused did not choose to enter appearance either in person or through a Counsel.