THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION No.7783 of 2009 DATED:23.09.2009 Between: P.Krishnamachary .. Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderaband and another .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION No.7783 of 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri S.Chandra Mohan Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri Syed Khader Mastan, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri A.Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor for the first respondent. No notice is being ordered to the second respondent, as the matter is being disposed of, at the stage of admission. The petitioner is facing prosecution for the offences punishable under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in C.C.No.695 of 2008 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore on the allegations of the second respondent that the petitioner was due money towards the gold ornaments purchased from him and issued a cheque, which was dishonoured, on which a statutory notice was issued on 21.02.2008, which was managed by the petitioner to be returned without any endorsement. The petitioner challenges the continuance of the criminal proceedings on the ground of the non-existence of a legally enforceable debt and also the non-issuance of a statutory notice. The material on record itself discloses that a copy of the statutory notice said to have been issued is filed into the Court and that specific allegations in this regard about the existence of a legally enforceable debt and the issuance of a statutory notice were made in the complaint. The allegations of the second respondent and the denials of the petitioner involve the disputed questions of fact and no conclusions can be arrived at by this Court in this restricted enquiry on such questions of fact by any deep probe. The inherent jurisdiction available only in the rarest of rare cases cannot be invoked on such disputed questions of fact, which have to be established before the trial Court and hence, the petition has to fail. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ___________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J 23rd September 2009 KH