IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.98 OF 2002 Between: P.S.Sandhu ..... Appellant/Petitioner AND 1. Smt. P.B. Choodamani ..... Accused/Respondent 2. The State of A.P. ..... Respondent/Respondents The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: This criminal appeal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., 1973, is directed against the order of acquittal of the respondent/accused of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, passed by the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, vide judgment, dated 18.09.2001, in C.C.No.131 of 2000. 2. The notice sent to the first respondent/accused was unserved as the accused vacated the house. Two remainders have been issued to the learned counsel for the appellant to furnish the correct address, but the counsel has not furnished the correct address. Therefore, this Court by an order, dated 21.04.2009, directed the learned counsel for the appellant to furnish the correct address of the first respondent within a period of four weeks from that date so that the office can send notice to her, failing which, the appeal shall stand dismissed. The said conditional order has not been complied with by the learned counsel for the appellant. Accordingly, the docket order has given an effect thereby dismissing the criminal appeal against the first respondent. In the absence of the first respondent/accused, the criminal appeal cannot be determined and decided. 3. Hence, the criminal appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. ______________ K.C. BHANU, J Date: 26th August, 2009 KL