THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.358 of 2010 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.143 of 2009 on the file of the Court of I Additional Munsif Magistrate, Narasaraopet, Guntur District. The petitioner is accused of the offences punishable under Sections 138 and 142-B of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- from the complainant on 01.02.2008 for business purpose and subsequently failed to repay the same on demand made by him and that when the cheque issued by the petitioner was presented in a bank, it was dishonoured and returned with an endorsement ‘funds insufficient’. Therefore, the complainant filed complaint against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. It is the contention of the petitioner that the complainant was holding empty pronotes and cheques issued by him and his wife regarding transactions of a chit and that the complainant by fabricating one such cheque, presented it in a bank for unlawful gain and therefore, there is no legally enforceable debt and that the complainant filed false complaint against the petitioner. Now the point for consideration is whether there are any grounds to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. As per the complaint, the petitioner joined as a member on 24.07.2003 in a chit run by the Bhagya Lakshmi Chits and Finance Corporation and that as the complainant was a partner of the said Corporation, there were transactions between the complainant and the accused in regard to the said chit. It is the admitted fact that the petitioner executed empty pronotes and cheques in favour of the complainant towards security of the chit. It is the contention of the petitioner that the complainant fabricated those empty cheques and presented one such cheque in a bank for unlawful gain. The truth or otherwise of the said defence cannot be appreciated by this Court unless a full fledged trial is taken up. When the petitioner himself admitted that the disputed cheques bear his signatures, it is for him to discharge his burden. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is premature for this Court to decide upon the liability of the petitioner without a full fledged trial. Hence, I see no grounds to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. In consequence, miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall stand dismissed. _______________ K.S.APPA RAO, J 08th November, 2012 GHN