NIRMALA DESHPANDE Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed to quash the proceedings in C. C. No. 870 of 2007 onthefile of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, hyderabad.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that the second respondent herein filed a private complaint against her under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for brevity 'the act') claiming that the petitioner had issued cheque dated:2. 8. 2007forrs. 15. 00 Lakhs in favourof the second respondentdrawn on First city Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd. , King Koti, hyderabad, which on presentation for encashment through the State Bank of hyderabad, was returned with endorsement "not a clearing member"; the complainant got issued a notice and then filed the present complaint.

(3.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the allegations are false; the cheque in question was fabricated; the second respondent surruptiousiy obtained signed cheque leaf belonging to petitioner, as he was working with the husband of the petitioner and had access to the records; the cheque was never presented to First City cooperative Urban Bank Ltd. , King Koti, hyderabad; but was presented at State Bank of Hyderabad and as the drawee bank was not a member of the clearing house, the State bank of Hyderabad did not present the cheque on the drawee bank; but returned to the presenterand in the circumstances the cheque was never presented on the concerned banker and for constituting an offence under section 138 of the Act, the cheque must have been presented to the drawee bank and if that cheque is returned with an endorsement "insufficient funds" then only the offence would be constituted. Under section 64 of the Act, presentation of the cheque on the drawee bank is mandatory.