THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRL.P.NO.8042 OF 2011 ORDER The petitioner-accused preferred this criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the proceedings in STC No.103 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pulivendla, Kadapa District, filed for the offences under Section 138 and 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘the Act’). The brief facts of the case are that after coming to know about the selling of land in an extent of Ac.1-22 cents in S.No.190/3B, the de facto complainant approached the land owner viz., Pitchakala Suray Venkata Satyanarayana of Dhawaleswaram, Rajahmundry, and after negotiations, the sale price was fixed at Rs.80,00,000/-. The de facto complainant paid an amount of Rs.65,00,000/- and agreed to pay the balance of sale price within one year and in respect of the said transaction, agreement of sale was executed in favour of the complainant. While so, the accused approached the land owner for sale of land to him and after consultation with the de facto complainant, the de facto complainant agreed to sell the said land to the accused and to that effect the accused paid an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- to the complainant as an advance and that the complainant paid the same to the original land owner. At the request of the complainant, the original land owner executed registered sale deed in favour of the wife of the accused and the accused issued a cheque for Rs.80,00,000/-. On presentation of the said cheque, it was dishonoured on the ground ‘account closed’. Hence, the complaint. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no relationship of debtor – creditor between the parties. He further contended that the complaint is presented basing on the forged document and that the notice issued by the de facto complainant is not within the stipulated time and that the de facto complainant is no way concerned with the alleged transaction. This Court is of the view that the above contentions are to be decided at the time of trial only and the petitioner is directed to raise all the points before the trial Court. With the above observation, the criminal petition is disposed of. The presence of the petitioner before the trial Court is dispensed with except the dates on which the learned Magistrate insists for the same and he shall properly be represented through his counsel. Miscellaneous petitions filed in this criminal petition, if any, shall stand closed. _______________ RAJA ELANGO,J rkk Dated: 7-9-2011