B. SUNITHA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Smt. B.Sunitha, W/o. Late Venkata Ramana is an accused in C.C.No.1 of 2015 on the file of XVI Special Magistrate, Red hills, Hyderabad, which is an out come of a private complaint registered for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act maintained by the second respondent T. Sharath, Advocate, Jubilee hills, Hyderabad.

(2.) The complaint speaks that a cheque bearing No.755370, dated 25.10.2014 for Rs.3 lakhs when presented, which is a part of the legal remuneration, returned dishonoured vide bank memo dated 1/6-11-14 and even after statutory notice dated 18.11.2014, served on the accused on 25.11.2014, but the accused failed to pay thereby liable for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. The complaint averments further show that the accused is no other than a relative to the complainant and on behalf of the accused and her family members, an advocate filed O.P. No. 152 of 1999, for motor accidental death of her husband late Venkata Ramana for compensation and before the motor accident tribunal, the compensation awarded by allowing in part of the claim was Rs. 64,88,000/- with interest 9% per annum and impugning the same, the insurance company preferred CMA No. 3454 of 2002 that was ended in dismissal on 02.07.2004 and insurance company filed a civil appeal No. 4844 of 2005, before the Supreme Court, that was also ended in dismissal on 24.09.2012; that insurance company deposited Rs. 85,73,880/- ultimately on 28.06.2013 to the credit of O.P.No.152 of 1999 and as per orders passed therein, the accused is entitled to 40% of the compensation towards her share which comes to Rs. 34,29,552/- and after receipt of the same, the accused issued cheque in favour of the complainant for Rs. 3,00,000/- on 25.10.2014 drawn on Andhra Bank, Vijayanagar Colony Branch, Masab Tank, Hyderabad towards professional and Court expenses upto Supreme Court and the cheque was sent through G.Nagaraju Advocate, who is the colleague of the complainant and relative of the accused who also rendered service by going to the residence of the accused for all necessary papers and signatures of the accused and the cheque when presented returned dishonoured, thereby the complaint.

(3.) The learned Magistrate after recording the sworn statement of the complainant Sri T.Sharath taken cognizance and taken the case on file. The accused filed the quash petition showing the first respondent-State as well as the second respondent defacto complainant to quash the said private complaint case proceedings.