Nalini Sundararaman vs M/S.Sri Vari Villas Private ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 22331 Mad

                                                                                   Crl.O.P. No.16057 of 2017

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                      DATED: 15.11.2021

                                                          CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

                                               Crl. O.P. No.16057 of 2017
                                           and Crl.M.P.No.9938 & 9939 of 2017

                1.Nalini Sundararaman

                2.S.Sundararaman                                                 ...Petitioners

                                                             Vs.

                M/s.Sri vari Villas Private Limited,
                Registered Office at G-3,9/6,
                Pasumathi Street, Kodambakkam,
                Chennai-600 024.
                Rep. by its authorized person
                Mr.V.Karthik.                                                    ...Respondent

                PRAYER :Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal
                Procedure Code, to call for the records in C.C.No.798 of 2015 on the file of the
                Metropolitan Magistrate Fast Track Court-III, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015 and
                quash the same.


                                    For Petitioners          : Mr.Mr.N.Ramakrishnan
                                                               or M/s.Waroan & Sai Rams

                                    For Respondent           : Mr.G.B.Sabridos




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

                Page 1 of 5
                                                                                 Crl.O.P. No.16057 of 2017

                                                         ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings

pending under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 on the file of

the Metropolitan Magistrate Fast Track Court-III, Saidapet,

Chennai-600 015.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for

the respondent.

3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that

there is no privity of contract between the petitioners and the respondent.

Infact, there were some transaction between one Ramesh and the petitioners in

the year 2011, wherein, several blank cheques were obtained by Mr.S.Ramesh

and the respondent in respect of the business transaction were fraudulently

filled up and misused for the purpose of extracting moneys from the petitioners.

In this regard, the complaint has been lodged by the respondent against one

Ramesh and FIR is also pending at this stage. He further submitted that the

blank cheques were misused and proceedings under Section 138 and 142 of the

N.I.Act have been initiated as against the petitioners. Hence, prayed to quash

the proceedings.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P. No.16057 of 2017

4. This Court has perused the entire materials available on record.

As the entire submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is relevant to

the factual dispute. Whether there is privity of contract between the petitioners

and respondent or not is as a matter of evidence and it cannot be gone at this

stage. The grounds raised by the counsel for the petitioner are all factual in

nature and it requires appreciation of evidence and this Court cannot decide the

same in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure

Code. It is left open to the petitioner to raise all the grounds before the Court

below and the same shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance

with law. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings pending

before the Court below.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners requested this Court to

dispense with the presence of the petitioner. Taking into consideration, the facts

and circumstances of the case, the presence of the petitioner is dispensed with

and he shall be represented by a counsel, who shall cross examine the witnesses

on the same day, they are examined in Chief. The petitioner shall be present

before the Court below at the time of questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C and

at the time of passing of the final judgment.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P. No.16057 of 2017

6. In such a view of the matter, this Court is of the view that quashing of

the case cannot be considered, at this point of time. Accordingly, this Criminal

Original Petition is dismissed with a direction to the Court below to complete

the proceedings in C.C.No.798 of 2015 within a period of six months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is for the petitioners to take all their

defence before the trial Court. The accused are directed to appear before the trial

Court within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and file

an application under Section 436 of Code of Criminal Procedure. On such filing

of the application, trial Court is directed to release the petitioners on bail on the

same day on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand

only) each with two sureties. If thereafter, they absconds, a fresh FIR can be

registered under Section 229 A of the Indian Penal Code. Consequently,

connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

15.11.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No msv

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P. No.16057 of 2017

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

msv

Crl. O.P. No.16057 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.No.9938 & 9939 of 2017

15.11.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis