HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9689 OF 2010 DATE: 04.10.2010 BETWEEN: 1. M/s. M & K Medical Distributors, At 11-10-715, Ward No.2, DRDA Road, Buhan Puram, Khammam – 507 001, Rep. by its partner Pattan Kareem. 2. Pattan Kareem. - - - Petitioners/Accused. AND 1. M/s. IDL Specialty Chemicals Limited, Rep. by its Secretarial Officer, R.S. Deshmukh. 2. The State of A.P., Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad, - - - Respondents. This Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9689 OF 2010 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.61 of 2010, on the file of learned X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Secunderabad (Hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Magistrate’). Heard Sri K.V. Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners/Accused and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. The brief facts are that the first respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, ‘the Act’) and the same is numbered as C.C. No.61 of 2010, which is now pending on the file of the learned Magistrate. It is the contention of the second petitioner that the Manager of the first respondent company received an amount of Rs.30,000/- from him on 03-06-2009 for sending drugs, but did not send any drugs. Subsequently, the second petitioner issued three blank cheques drawn on ING Vysya Bank Limited, Khammam, as a security for the supply of drugs, but in spite of the payment of cash and issuing personal cheques by the second petitioner, the first respondent did not send the drugs to the petitioner. Subsequently, in view of the threats hurled by the officials of the first respondent, the petitioner got issued a legal notice dated 15- 09-2009 to the Gulf Oil Corporation Limited, Hyderabad, calling upon the respondent to approach the petitioner immediately to settle the accounts and also to return the said three blank cheques, which were issued by the second petitioner as security for the supply of drugs. But, in spite of the same, the first respondent filled the blank cheques and presented them in the bank, and when they were dishonoured, issued notice under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and filed the complaint. All the above-mentioned facts are required to be proved by adducing the evidence. The truth or otherwise of the contents of the case filed by the petitioner, seeking to quash the proceedings, will not be decided in the petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is not a case, wherein ex-facie proceedings launched against the petitioners in C.C. No. 61 of 2010, are false and not maintainable. For the foregoing reasons, I find absolutely no merits in the petition and accordingly, dismiss the petition at the stage of admission. ________________ R. KANTHA RAO, J Dated: 04.10.2010 Dsh.