HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5009 of 2007 DT.29.07.2010 K.Lakshminarayana. …Petitioner V. The State of A.P., rep. By its Public Prosecutor and another … Respondents The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5009 of 2007 ORDER:- This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in C.C.No.2005 of 2004 pending on the file of V Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, wherein the petitioner is facing the trial for the offences punishable under Section 138 N.I.Act and Section 420 IPC. It is not disputed that the six cheques issued by the petitioner towards the instalments of the loan amount at Rs.7,290/- per month have been dishonoured for insufficient funds on 24.09.2004 and on such dishonouring, a notice contemplated under Section 138 of N.I.Act was issued by the complainant to the petitioner on 08.10.2004, calling upon him to make payment of the amount due under the above cheques and lodged the above complaint. The only ground on which the petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings seems to be that for due recovery of the loan amount, the complainant bank invoked its powers under SARFAESI Act and sold the property mortgaged with the bank and realized an amount of Rs.6,98,389/- towards repayment of the housing loan and no notice was issued to the petitioner for sale of the said houses and even after appropriation of the said amount still there is a short fall of Rs.1,13,641/- plus interest from 01.04.2005. Therefore, once the bank sold the secured property and realized the amount, they cannot proceed with the case. Even as per the petitioner’s own admission, the bank realized only a part of the loan amount and still there is a short fall of Rs.1,13,641/- plus interest. If that be the case, the proceedings cannot be quashed merely on the ground that the bank sold the property by invoking the powers under SARFAESI Act. If the petitioners have not given any notice for sale of the said property under SARFAESI Act, the remedy of the petitioner is to approach the appropriate forum, but the same cannot be a ground to quash the proceedings. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J 29th July 2010 lmv