THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.13706 of 2010 ORDER: Petitioner approaches this Court with a prayer to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.2742 of 2010 on the file of the III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, whereby he is facing trial for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short ‘the Act’). The short point for consideration before this Court as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner is as follows: According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, even prior to the deposit of the cheque, the petitioner has informed the complainant not to deposit the same and also he relied on the notice issued by him. He further submitted that in reply to the statutory notice issued by the complainant herein, he has also incorporated regarding the issuance of earlier notice and also stated that the cheques were given as security only. Even after knowing that the accused has informed the complainant not to deposit the cheques, the complainant presented the same and got it bounced and filed the present complaint, which amounts to abuse of process of law. This Court perused the records and also heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner. In an offence under Section 138 of the Act, once the complainant established that the debt is legally enforceable one, the petitioner herein has every right to rebut the presumption by way of relying on the documents, which are placed before this Court. Hence, this Court is of the view that the points raised by the petitioner herein can be raised before the trial Court, and this Court cannot go into all these aspects in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very limited and this Court is not in a position to know what is the authenticity of the documents produced by the petitioner. This Court cannot conduct trial on the documents produced by the petitioner and it is duty of the learned Magistrate to verify the authenticity and genuineness of the documents concerned. On the basis of the said documents, if the petitioner is able to establish or rebut the presumption, then it is the duty of the learned Magistrate to consider the same. With the above observation, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As far as the presence of the petitioner is concerned, as the offence is under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, wherein the question of identity of the accused does not arise, the same is hereby dispensed with except the dates on which the learned Magistrate insists for the same and he shall be represented through his counsel. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed along with the criminal petition shall stand closed. ________________ RAJA ELANGO, J. 25th February 2011, Rns.