M.N.Swaminathan vs K.Pari
2022 Latest Caselaw 8861 Mad

                                                                                  Crl.O.P.No.7872 of 2022

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    DATED: 27.04.2022

                                                          CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN

                                                  Crl.O.P.No.7872 of 2022
                                               in Crl.A.SR.No.29408 of 2019

                  M.N.Swaminathan                                                     ... Petitioner
                                                            Vs.

                  K.Pari                                                              ... Respondent

                  PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 378(4) of
                  Cr.P.C., praying to grant leave to enabling the petitioner to file appeal against
                  the acquittal by Judgment dated 08.04.2019, passed by the learned XIX
                  Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in Crl.A.No.191 of 2018.
                                         For Petitioner     : Mr.R.Vijayaraghaven
                                         For Respondent     : Mr.R.Sankarasubbu
                                                          ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner for

granting leave to prefer an appeal as against the judgment dated 08.04.2019

made in Crl.A.No.191 of 2018 on the file of the learned XIX Additional

Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7872 of 2022

2. The case of the petitioner is that in the year 2015, he filed a

complainant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, (herein after

referred to as “NI Act”) as against the respondent, alleging that the respondent

is liable to be convicted under Section 138 of NI Act. Later the case was

transferred to the Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Fast Track Court-I, Egmore,

Chennai and assigned case number as C.C.No.2182 of 2016. Thereafter by the

judgment dated 19.03.2018, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, after

completion of trial, found the respondent guilty for the offence punishable

under Section 138 of NI Act and sentenced him to undergo simple

imprisonment for six months and to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- as fine.

3. Aggrieved over the same, the respondent in this case viz., Pari filed

an appeal before the XIX Additional Sessions Court, Chennai in Crl.A.No.191

of 2018, wherein the learned XIX Additional Sessions Judge, by the judgment

dated 08.04.2019, allowed the appeal and acquitted the respondent from the

charges. Challenging the said findings the petitioner is intended to filed an

appeal for which, he filed this present Criminal Original Petition praying to

grant leave for filing an appeal.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7872 of 2022

4. Heard Mr.R.Vijayaraghaven, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and Mr.R.Sankarasubbu, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent.

5. Now on going through the impugned judgment rendered by the

first appellate Court, it was clearly held that in the suit filed by the

petitioner/complainant in O.S.No.1119 of 2015, the respondent/accused herein

paid the entire cheque amount and therefore, it would not necessary to punish

the accused and accordingly he passed an order of acquittal.

6. In this regard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

would submit that in respect of issuance of cheque, filing the criminal

proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act and also filing of suit are entirely

distinct one and both are cannot be clubbed together for considering the issues

raised in the respective cases. He would further submit that though the

petitioner herein has received the cheque amount in full, he wanted to punish

the respondent for the penal act committed by him under the provision of

Section 138 of NI Act.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7872 of 2022

7. Now on considering the above submission with the relevant

records, it is true that the petitioner is having an option to file a civil suit as well

as the Criminal complaint for recovery of the cheque amount. In this regard, it is

rightly observed by the first appellate Court that the entire cheque amount has

been paid by the respondent and as of now there is no outstanding due is

pending with the respondent.

8. In this regard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also

concedes that there was no outstanding due with the respondent. But in respect

of the same, the petitioner is wanted to punish the respondent, which is

unnecessary. More than that, the entire cheque amount was paid before the year

2017. Accordingly, acquitting the accused is no way prejudice to the right of the

petitioner. The entire story stated by the petitioner would go to show that only

in order to wreak vengeance, he filed this petition praying to grant leave to

prefer an appeal.

9. Considering the number of cases pending in similar nature, this

Court is of the opinion that the reasoning given by the petitioner in this petition

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7872 of 2022

to leave to file appeal is not satisfactory one and therefore, prima facie, this

Court is not convinced that any arguable point in the appeal.

10. In view of the above discussion, this Criminal Original Petition

stands dismissed. Consequently, the Criminal Appeal in Crl.A.SR.No.29408 of

2019 is rejected.

27.04.2022 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes

rts

To

1.The XIX Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

2.The Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court-I, Egmore, Chennai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7872 of 2022

R.PONGIAPPAN,J.

rts

Crl.O.P.No.7872 of 2022 in Crl.A.SR.No.29408 of 2019

27.04.2022

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