THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.2194 of 2008 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the complaint in C.C.No.607 of 2006 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, L.B.Nagar. The second respondent which is registered under the Andhra Pradesh Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act, 1995 has filed a complaint under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 alleging that petitioner/accused is a member of its society with membership No.810; that on 30.07.2002, he executed a guarantee agreement in its favour in connection with a term loan of Rs.50,000/- obtained by his colleague, by name, Sri G.Rama Rao and that subsequently, when the said Rama Rao, original loanee, was found to be defaulter having failed to maintain the repayment schedule as promised, the same was brought to his notice as he stood as guarantor. It further alleged that by its constant follow- up action, the petitioner finally came forward to discharge his joint liability and on 08.05.2006, he issued a cheque bearing No.193380 drawn on Oriental Bank of Commerce, Habsiguda branch, for Rs.80,000/-. It also alleged that when the said cheque was presented, the same was dishonoured and returned along with memo, dated 08.05.2006 with an endorsement of insufficient funds in his bank account. In this Criminal Petition, it is the allegation of the petitioner that the said cheque was not issued in connection with the loan amount of Rama Rao and it is one of the blank cheques issued by him to secure personal loan from the second respondent. It is further alleged that he has issued cheques of Global Trust Bank, Habsiguda branch but not Oriental Bank of Commerce. It is stated that Global Trust Bank Limited is merged with Oriental Bank of Commerce in amalgamation proceedings and afterwards, the account of the petitioner was activated on his application on 09.02.2007 as such he has not committed any offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Whether the alleged cheque issued by the petitioner is in connection with the personal loan obtained by him or to discharge the debt standing in the name of Rama Rao, for whom he stood as guarantor, is a matter which is to be enquired in the trial. It is to be noticed that after amalgamation proceedings, the cheque was presented by the second respondent society and the same was returned with an endorsement ‘insufficient funds’. When such is the case, whether the cheques issued by the petitioner pertaining to erstwhile Bank are valid or not is a matter to be gone into in the trial. From a perusal of the contents of the complaint, it cannot be said that no case is made out against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in this Criminal Petition to quash the complaint in C.C.No.607 of 2006. The Criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 30th NOVEMBER, 2011. kvni