THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2608 OF 2008 DATED: 05-08-2010 Between 1.M/s Midland Industries Ltd., rep by its Managing Director, RSN Raju 2. RSN Raju …Petitioners And 1.State of A.P. rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another …Respondents-Complainants THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2608 OF 2008 ORDER: This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed to quash the order, dated 02-04-2008, in Crl.R.P.No.34 of 2008 on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in confirming the order, dated 30-10-2007 passed in Crl.M.P.No.5551 of 2006 in C.C.No.384 of 2000, on the file of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, wherein the petition filed to discharge the petitioners –A1 and A2 from the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC was dismissed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that for the self same cause of action, C.C.No.1335 of 1998 before the XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad was filed for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the petitioners, that after conducting full enquiry, the accused was acquitted by virtue of judgment, dated 18-11-1998 on the ground that the cheque in question was not supported by consideration and therefore, continuation of proceedings is nothing but abuse of process of Court. 3. On the other hand, counsel representing the learned public Prosecutor contended that the allegations made out prima facie offence of cheating as the accused misappropriated the amount for their use in stead of using the same for purchasing polywool and therefore, she prays to dismiss the petition. 4. In spite of giving several opportunities, none appears for the 2nd respondent. 5. The allegation is that A1 and A2 approached the complainant for financial assistance by way of bill of discount and stated that the amount is required for purchasing Polywool. Then A2 submitted a bill dated 29-03-1997 for Rs.25,00,000/-. The bill was drawn by A3. Hence, the complaint. 6. The same allegations are leveled in C.C.No.1335 of 1998 on the file of XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad wherein a categorical finding has been given that the complainant company has not paid the amount to M/s Nalanda Synthetics Ltd., under Bill No.5, which is the subject matter and as such, there is no existing legal liability for the accused for the cheque issued under Ex.P8 therein. The cause of action in both the cases is one and the same. Therefore, the accused cannot be prosecuted by virtue of Section 300 Cr.P.C. again for the self same cause of action. Hence, the continuation of proceedings is nothing but abuse of process of Court. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed setting aside the order, dated 02-04-2008, in Crl.R.P.No.34 of 2008 on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. ------------------------------- JUSTICE K.C.BHANU DATED:05-08-2010 Hsd