Madras High Court
Selvaraj vs M.Muthusamy on 4 October, 2021
Crl.O.P.No.17794 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.No.17794 of 2021
and
Crl.MP.Nos.9772 & 9776 of 2021
Selvaraj
M/s.Sakthi Speed Parcel
IC Oil Bhavan, Jaiyam Apartment
Chennakrishnapuram,
Sankari Nagar, Salem – 636 007. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.M.Muthusamy
2.Chinnathayee ... Respondents
Rep.by her Power of Attorney
P.Easwaran
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct join or simultaneous trial of
S.T.C.No.761 of 2019 pending on the file of the Learned Judicial
Magistrate, Valappady and S.T.C.No.155 of 2020 pending on the file of
the Judicial Magistrate (FTC), Tiruchengode in the court of Judicial
Magistrate Convenient to both parties.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Haribabu
For Respondents : Mr.R.Vinothraja
Govt.Advocate (Crl.side)
Page No.1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.17794 of 2021
ORDER
The petitioner, who is the accused in STC No.761 of 2019 and
STC.No.155 of 2020 on the complaint lodged by the first and second
respondents respectively, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Valappady and the learned Judicial Magistrate, (FTC), Tiruchengode, has
filed this petition.
2.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the
petitioner is running Sakthi Speed Parcel service and for his business, he
has taken the vehicles of the first and second respondents' Lorry bearing
registration Nos.TN 54 P 7088 and TN 54 P 6975 for rent. There was
some dispute with regard to the payment of rent, for which, the
respondents herein along with one S.Sardhar, who is the lorry owner
bearing registration No.TN 30 BJ 3834, approached the Pallapatti Police
Station and there, the petitioner’s manager was taken to the police
station, where, he admitted the relationship between the petitioner and
the respondents and also with regard to the dues, there was some
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.17794 of 2021
difference in quantum. Blank cheques, which have been signed, left with
his manager, were taken away by the petitioner and thereafter, got
dishonoured and hence, this petition.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on receipt of
the notice, he had given a detailed reply. The crux of the issues in both
the cases are one and the same. Hence, he seeks trial of both the cases to
be tried together or simultaneously. Further, he submits that the petitioner
is hailing from Sankari Nagar, Salem and it will be great difficulty for the
petitioner to attend both the Courts.
4.Considering the submissions and on a perusal of the materials, it
is seen that STC No.761 of 2019 is pending for trial for the past three
years before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Valappady and STC No.155
of 2020 is pending for trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Thiruchengode for the past one year. As per Section 142 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, the jurisdiction is that where the cheque has
been presented and got dishonored, that specific jurisdiction has been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.17794 of 2021
fixed, depending on cause of action. This has been done for the benefit of
the complaint to proceed against the person, who had defaulted by not
honoring the cheques. The defence of the petitioner cannot be considered
now. It can be decided only during trial. The petitioner presupposing that
both the cases are identical in nature, may not be true. Finding that the
complainant in STC No.155 of 2020 is 66 years old lady a senior citizen,
likewise, the complainant in STC No.761 of 2019 is also an elderly
person, both the Courts are not much far away and easily accessible to
the petitioner. This Court finds that the petitioner's reason for seeking
transfer of investigation relying upon the decision in Nathi Lal and
others Vs. State of U.P. And others reported in 1990 (Supp) SCC 145 is
not applicable to facts and circumstances the case. In view of the same,
this court is not inclined to entertain the criminal original petition.
Accordingly, the criminal original petition is dismissed directing the trial
Court to conclude the Trial within a period of three months from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, in case, the petitioner files 317
petition, the same to be considered liberally. The only condition is that
the petitioner to appear before the trial Court without fail on the hearing
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.17794 of 2021
dates, like questioning, pre-trial questioning, 313 questioning and to
receive the judgments and whenever Trial Court insist his appearance.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No 04.10.2021
sms
To
1.The Learned Judicial Magistrate, Valappady.
2.The Judicial Magistrate (FTC), Tiruchengode.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.17794 of 2021
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
sms
Crl.O.P.No.17794 of 2021
and
Crl.MP.Nos.9772 & 9776 of 2021
04.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
