IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.737 OF 2003 Between: Machani Agro Agencies ..... Appellant/Complainant AND 1. Y. Raghavulu ..... Accused 2. The Sate of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ..... Respondents/Complainant The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: The Criminal Appeal, under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment, dated 22.04.2003, in C.C.No.412 of 2000, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kurnool, whereunder and whereby, the first respondent/accused was found not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. The Criminal Appeal was admitted on 07.09.2004. Notice sent to the first respondent/accused on 20.09.2004 was returned unserved. Reminders have been issued to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant on 19.04.2007 and 13.05.2008 for furnishing the correct address of the first respondent. Several opportunities were given by this Court to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant to furnish the correct address of the first respondent/accused. Therefore, this Court passed conditional order, dated 20.07.2009, directing the learned counsel appearing for the appellant to furnish the correct address of the first respondent/accused by 10.08.2009 so that the office can send notice to him, failing which, the Criminal Appeal shall stand dismissed. The said conditional order has not been complied with by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Thereafter, to provide one more opportunity, this Court vide conditional order dated 08.09.2009, directed the learned counsel for the appellant to furnish correct address of first respondent/accused within four weeks. Thereafter also, three more adjournments were taken for the same purpose. Still the correct address has not been furnished. Accordingly, the docket proceeding, dated 08.09.2009, is given effect. In the absence of the first respondent/accused, the Criminal Appeal cannot be decided or determined. 3. Hence, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. _______________ (K.C. BHANU, J) Date: 1st December, 2009 KL