IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1573 OF 2001 Between: M/s. TCI Finance Ltd. ..... Appellant/Petitioner/Complainant AND 1. Sri P. Siv Kumar D. Iyer 2. Sri P. Srinivasarao 3. The Sate of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ..... Accused/Respondents The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: The Criminal Appeal under Section 378 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, “Cr.P.C.”), is directed against the judgment, dated 13.08.2001, in C.C.No.1403 of 1997, on the file of the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, whereunder and whereby Respondent Nos.1 & 2/Accused Nos.2 & 3 were found not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 read with 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, "the Act"). 2. The Criminal Appeal was admitted on 18.10.2001. Notices and reminders sent to Respondent Nos.1 and 2 were returned unserved. Therefore, a memo was issued to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant on 15.04.2008 to furnish the correct address of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2, but he has not yet furnished. Thereafter, this Court by an order, dated 20.04.2009, directed the learned counsel appearing for the appellant to furnish the correct address of Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and file proof of service within a period of four weeks, failing which the Criminal Appeal stands dismissed. But at the request of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, four weeks time was granted for furnishing the correct address of Respondent No.1. Thereafter, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has taken a notice to the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. That notice has not been served and returned with an endorsement “addressee not found”. 3. This Criminal Appeal has been pending for the last eight years. The Criminal Appeal cannot be decided and determined in the absence of Respondent Nos.1 and 2 who are the Accused Nos.2 and 3. 4. Therefore, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. ______________ (K.C. BHANU, J) Date: 10th November, 2009 KL