Smt. R.Krishnaveni, v. The State Of A.P., Rep By Pp

\

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

, AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVET/BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: '1489 OF 2007 Crl.Revision Case under Sections 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 27-10-2006 in C.C. No. 1939 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Malkajgiri. Between:

Smt. R.Krishnaveni, W/o. R.Srihari, Business, R/o. 10-186/2, Vasanthapuri Colony, Ir/alkajgiri, R.R. District.

...PETITIONER ANO

1. The State Of A.P., rep. by Public Prosecutor, Hyderabad.

2. S.Mohan Reddy, S/o. Rami Reddy, Business, Rlo.45-26113, Plot No.6, Shirdi Nagar, Upperguda, RR.District.

...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. D.VENKATESH ( not present ) Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 :THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 : None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON,BLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER Criminal Revision se No,1489 ot 2007 ORDER:

Heard the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No,1-State and perused the record'

2. No representation for the petitioner. On earlier occasion also, there was no representation for the petitioner. It appears that the revision petitioner has no interest to pursue the matter.

3. The challenge in this Criminal Revision Case is to the Docket Order, dated 27.70.2006, passed in C.C.No.1939 of 2005 by the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri, whereby, the subject complaint filed by the petitioner/complainant against the respondent No,2 herein/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 r/w 741 & 742 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was dismissed For default. The impugned order reads as follows; "Accused is present. Complainant is absent. No representation. As per the seen the record complainant is regularly absent. Hence the complaint is dismissed for default."

4. The Court below, after recording a categorical finding that the petitioner herein/complainant was regularly absent before the Court below, rightly dismissed the complaint for default by exercising power under Section 256 of Cr.P.C. There is no illegality or impropriety in the docket order under challenge.

5.

Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Revision Case shall stand closed.

SD/.CH.VEN KATESWARU LU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY'

Yt -/ SECTION OFFICER To

1. The X Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri , Ranga Reddy District.(with records if any)

2. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana (OUT) CanEJ-- --

3. One CC to SRl. D.VENKATESHrAdvocate [OPUC]

4. Two CD Copies

5. One Spare Copy TR 3A,

HIGH COURT I DATED:1711112021 , I

ORDER

CRLRC.No.1489 of 2007 TArA S Jo 'J 04 DEC202I t * o vt .SP DISMISSING THE CRL.R.C.

v,\$