GANIMINENI MADHU Vs. SAKHAMURI RANGAIAH CHOWDARY AND ORS.
LAWS(APH)-2019-11-54
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on November 29,2019

Ganimineni Madhu Appellant
VERSUS
Sakhamuri Rangaiah Chowdary And Ors. Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

BANI SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SUKUR ALI VS. STATE OF ASSAM [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY,J. - (1.)Assailing the Order, dated 20-11-2018, passed in Criminal Appeal No.27 of 2016 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati, whereby the Criminal Appeal was dismissed for default owing to the absence of the appellant, this Criminal Revision Case is preferred.
(2.)The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass and may be stated as follows: The Revision Petitioner is the Accused in C.C.No.99 of 2014 on the file of IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati. The said case relates to a complaint filed by the complainant therein, who is respondent No.1 herein, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, for dishonour of the cheque issued by the petitioner. At the culmination of the trial in the trial Court, the petitioner was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 NI Act and he was convicted for the said offence and he was sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of Six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to undergo SI for one month.
(3.)Aggrieved thereby, he has preferred Criminal Appeal No.27 of 2016 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Court, Tirupati. When the said appeal was coming on for hearing and when the same stood posted to 20-11-2018 for hearing, it appears that the Appellant was called absent on that day and that there was also no representation on his behalf. Since the first respondent was present on that day, the learned V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tirupati, by the impugned order dismissed the said appeal for default.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.