HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1079 & 1156 OF 2008 DATE:22-07-2010 CRIMINAL PETITION No.1079 OF 2008 BETWEEN Kapula Narasimha Rao …Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad & Another. …Respondent CRIMINAL PETITION No.1156 OF 2008 BETWEEN G.Shaji Rao …Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad & Another. …Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1079 & 1156 OF 2008 COMMON ORDER: These two petitions under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.738 of 2007 and C.C.No.336 of 2007 (originally, C.C.No.338 of 2004 and C.C.No.940 of 2003 respectively, on the file of Sub-Divisional Magistrate-Mobile Court, Bhadrachalam) pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam for the offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 of I.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on the order of this Court in Crl.P.No.1738 of 2005, dated 14.2.2008 contends that no Court inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class shall try any offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and therefore, the Sub- Divisional Magistrate-Mobile Court, Bhadrachalam was not conferred with the powers of Judicial Magistrate of First Class as on the date of alleged offence or as on the date of taking cognizance of offence by him. Therefore, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. Learned counsel for second respondent fairly conceded that this Court in Crl.P.No.1738 of 2005 by order, dated 14.2.2008 quashed the proceedings initiated for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act holding that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bhadrachalam is not conferred with the powers of a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class and therefore, he cannot take cognizance of the offence. Admittedly, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bhadrachalam, who initially took cognizance of the offence, was not conferred with the powers of Judicial Magistrate of First Class and therefore, he cannot take cognizance of the offence as on the relevant date. Therefore, following the order of this Court in Crl.P.No.1738 of 2005, dated 14.2.2008 and for the reasons mentioned therein, the impugned proceedings are quashed. The Criminal Petitions are accordingly allowed. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. JULY 22, 2010 Tsr.