S.Jaychabdran Salai Nadar vs The State Of Maharashtra
2026 Latest Caselaw 836 Bom

Bombay High Court

S.Jaychabdran Salai Nadar vs The State Of Maharashtra on 23 January, 2026

Author: R.N. Laddha

Bench: R.N. Laddha

                Digitally signed by SMITA
SMITA JOHNSON   JOHNSON GONSALVES
GONSALVES       Date: 2026.01.23 22:46:56
                +0530




                                     sg                                                                                              14.revn228-05.docx


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                                 Criminal Revision Application No.228 of 2005
                                                                                        With
                                                      Criminal Application No.178 of 2006
                                                                                             In
                                                 Criminal Revision Application No.228 of 2005


                       S Jaychandran Salai Nadar                                                                                ... Applicant
                                            versus
                       The State of Maharashtra and Anr                                                                         ... Respondents
                                                                                         With
                                                 Criminal Revision Application No.229 of 2005
                                                                                        With
                                                      Criminal Application No.179 of 2006
                                                                                             In
                                                 Criminal Revision Application No.229 of 2005


                       S Jaychandran Salai Nadar                                                                                ... Applicant
                                            versus
                       The State of Maharashtra and Anr               ... Respondents
                                                      ----
                       Ms Aneeta Vasani, i/b. M/s Pandey & Co., for the applicant.
                       Mr Arfan Sait, APP, for the respondent/ State.
                       Mr Atharva S Jagtap, i/b. Mr CK Pendse, for respondent No.2.
                       Mr Jaychandran S Nadar, applicant-in-person present in the
                       Court.

                                                                                     Page 1 of 3
                                                                        __________________________________________________

                                                                              23 January 2026



                                              ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2026                                                   ::: Downloaded on - 23/01/2026 23:29:20 :::
      sg                                                                                              14.revn228-05.docx


                                                         ----
                                                                                Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.

Date: 23 January 2026.

P.C.:

. These revision applications are directed against the judgment and order rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai, confirming the orders of conviction against the applicant/accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act by the learned Magistrate, vide his judgments and orders dated 22 December 2004. By that orders, the accused/accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to suffer SI for one year and pay fine of Rs.5000/-, in default to suffer SI for three months, in each case. In addition thereto, he was directed to pay compensation to the complainant with default stipulation.

2. Today, once again, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/original accused has prayed for an adjournment and expressed her inability to argue the present revision applications stating that the papers are misplaced. Keeping that, and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the adjournment, as a last chance.

__________________________________________________

23 January 2026

sg 14.revn228-05.docx

3. Stand over to 5 February 2026. Liberty to file the written notes of arguments.

(R.N. Laddha, J.)

__________________________________________________

23 January 2026