Arava Johanson v. State Of Ap.,

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRIMINAL PETITION No.314 OF 2018 ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner-accused seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.523 of 2016 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore registered for the offence punishable under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2.

Heard both learned counsel for the petitioneraccused and perused the record. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused would submit that the petitioner-accused borrowed an amount of Rs.3.00 lakhs on 27.8.2010 from respondent No.2-finance company executing loan agreement and other documents, and thereafter, paid entire amount, and that he is not due any amount to it; that a false case is foisted against the petitioner in spite of receipt of entire loan amount and interest and settlement made between the parties, and ultimately, prayed to quash the impugned proceedings.

4.

The material on record reveals that respondent No.2-complainant is a registered company. It is rendering financial assistance to general public. The petitioner borrowed an amount of Rs.3.00 lakhs on 27.8.2010 from respondent No.2-complainant and executed a loan agreement agreeing to repay the same with interest at 25.99% per annum. The duration of the repayment was 36 monthly instalments @ at Rs.14,833/- commending from 15.09.2010 and ending by 15.08.2013. The petitioner paid

26 monthly instalments and thereafter did not pay the instalments as per the agreement entered into between the parties. The petitioner gave a cheque for Rs.1,84,000/- on 12.06.2013 in favour of respondent No.2 company towards payment of amount due under the above loan agreement. The said cheque was dishonoured and a cheque return Memo dated 14.06.2013 was issued by the banker. Even after issuing statutory notice also, the cheque amount was not paid.

5.

The question whether the cheque in question was given towards discharge of the legally enforceable debt, is required to be decided after due trial. If the petitioner paid the loan amount in toto, definitely he can put up his defence before the Court and get the proceedings terminated. As per the circumstances of the case and the material placed on record, it is not appropriate at this stage to hold that the petitioner paid entire amount due to respondent No.2-complainant. Continuation of the impugned proceedings would not be abuse of process of law. There are no circumstances to allow the present petition as prayed for. The Criminal Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

6.

In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ____________________________ DR.SHAMEEM AKTHER, J DATED: 22.1.2018 DRK

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRIMINAL PETITION No. 314 OF 2018 22.1.2018 DRK