Consequently all the companyplaints are number pending before XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, for disposal in accordance with law.
It was, inter alia, companytended by the Respondents before the High Court as under That the aforesaid companyplaint depicted the applicants as the partners of M s Sri Lakshmi Agencies.
The Respondents herein arrayed as Accused Nos.
The learned Single Judge of the High Court after perusal of the record and hearing the parties found it fit and proper to discharge the Respondents.
It was alleged in the said companyplaint that cheques bearing number.382874 and 382875 dated 31.03.2004 for Rs.15,00,000/ each drawn on Union Bank of India, Vijaywada Main Branch were issued by the accused persons.
The said cheques, when presented to their banker, were returned as unpaid vide Cheques Return Advices dated 29.05.2004, with the remarks, Payment stopped by Drawer.
4, 6 and 7 in the said companyplaints thereafter filed applications in the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad under Section 482 of the Cr.
Hence this Appeal.
Deepak Verma, J. Leave granted.
1874 of 2008 are taken into companysideration.
For the sake of companyvenience, facts mentioned in SLP Crl.
P.C. for their discharge.
That the aforesaid averments is a false one.
Appellant as Complainant filed a criminal companyplaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida U.P. on 23.7.2004, under Sections 138 and 141 of the Act.
We have, accordingly, heard learned companynsel, Mr. Ajay Dahiya for Appellant and Mr. V.R. Choudary, for Respondents at length and perused the record.
Particularly when the companyplainant M s Rallis India Ltd. was fully aware that the applicants had severed their companynections with M s Lakshmi agencies much prior to the execution of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 31.03.2004 and also the issuance of the dishonoured cheques on 31.03.2004.
