Madras High Court
M.S.Mediaone Global ... vs M/S.Ad Bureau Advertising Pvt. ... on 27 January, 2022
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P.No.587 of 2022
1.M.s.Mediaone Global Entertainment Ltd.,
Rep. by its authorised Signatory,
J.Murali Manohar,
No.1, Wallace Lane,
1st Floor, Mataji Complex, Mount Road,
Chennai.
2.Dr.J.Murali Manohar ... Petitioners
Versus
M/s.Ad bureau Advertising Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by Mr.Abirchand Nahar,
Rayala Towers,
781, Mount Road,
Chennai – 600 002. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the order dated 16.12.2021
Page No.1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
in Crl.M.P.No.22621 of 2021 in C.A.No.199 of 2021 on the file of
the Principal Sessions Court, Chennai, insofar it imposes a
condition on the petitioners to deposit 20% of the compensation
amount.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Saikrishnan
ORDER
This petition has been filed to set aside the order dated
16.12.2021 in Crl.M.P.No.22621 of 2021 in C.A.No.199 of 2021 on
the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Chennai, insofar it imposes
a condition on the petitioners to deposit 20% of the compensation
amount.
2. The petitioners are the accused under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act, in the complaint filed by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
respondent in C.C.No.5702 of 2016 on the file of the Metropolitan
Magistrate, FTC-I, Egmore @ Allikulam, Chennai, and they were
convicted by the trial Court by the order dated 04.12.202. The trial
Court, imposed six moths simple imprisonment and also directed
the accused to pay a sum of Rs.7,70,00,000/- as compensation
within a period of 8 weeks. Aggrieved against the same, the
petitioner preferred an appeal before the Principal Sessions Court,
Chennai in C.A.No.199 of 2021 the same was admitted and filed
Crl.M.P.No.22621 of 2021 seeking suspension of sentence as well
as seeking exemption from payment of compensation of amount till
the disposal of the appeal. The Principal Sessions Judge, by the
order dated 16.12.2021 granted suspension of sentence, confirming
the compensation ordered by the trial Court and directed the
petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount within 60
days from the date of the order, against which the present petition.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that the first
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
petitioner was engaged in the production of Tamil Film
Kochadaiyan starring actor Rajinikanth, who entered into the
business agreement with the respondent for completing the post
production works of the said film “Kochadaiyan.” This business
agreement was for Rs.20 crores. Finally out of Rs.20 crores, Rs.10
crores was only paid, one of the condition was that Rs.2.40 crores
to be paid as profit. For some reasons, the movie could not be
released as planned. In the meanwhile, the agreement of Rs.20
crores not effected and transaction for only Rs.10 crores transacted
which is admitted by PW1 in his evidence. Ex.P2/agreement is on
commission basis and pursuant to this agreement, only Rs.10 crores
paid. Further he admit that during 1st Week of December, 2014,
Rs.4 crores demand draft was received by him in Bangalore. He
further admit that upto 30.11.2014, he received a sum of Rs.8.74
crores out of Rs.10 Crores. Thus, the balance amount to be repaid
was only Rs.1.36 crores and there was dispute with regard to the
interest part of it and payment of Rs.2.24 crores on the profit. In the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
business agreement, three cheques were handed over by the
petitioners, two of these cheques, which are security cheques
handed over in the business is filled up by the respondent, one for
Rs.5 crores and another for Rs.3 crores. The case in C.C.No.5702 of
2016 pertains to Rs.5 crores cheque. Though PW1 complaint
admits a limited liability and receiving back substantial amount
from the petitioners' Company, the trial Court gave a finding that
the petitioners had not discharged the liability for Rs.5 crores on
misconception. Further imposed an interest @ 9% for Rs.2.74
crores and directed the petitioners to pay Rs.7.7 crores as
compensation which is not proper, without sound reasoning. He
further submitted that for imposing compensation as per Section
357 of Cr.PC., the Hon'ble Apex Court as well this Court time and
again held that reasons to be given before compensation is ordered
justifying whether the compensation is proportionate to the loss. In
this case, there is no specific order on compensation under Section
357 of Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner also placed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Surinder
Singh Deswal Alias Colonel and others Vs. Virender Gandhi,
reported in (2019) 11 SCC 341 in the appeal preferred by them in
C.A.No.199 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.No.22621 of 2021. Though the
Sessions Court referred to the judgment, failed to give any reason
why the same is not considered, ignored and passed an order
confirming the trial Court ordering of compensation, directed the
petitioner pay 20% of the compensation amount within 60 days.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
for the same dispute Civil Suit is filed by the respondent in
C.S.No.545 of 2015 seeking decree for Rs.6.84 crores. Imposing
20% on Rs.7.7 crores which is Rs.1.5 crores would amount to pre-
determining the case by fixing liability. He further submitted that
the Apex Court held in para No.8 of judgment supra that “the
Appellate Court in exception for special reasons can waive pre-
deposit” and therefore, submitted that the Sessions Court directing
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
the petitioner to deposit 20% of compensation liable to be set aside.
5. It is seen that the complainant, in his evidence, admit
that out of Rs.10 crores, Rs.8.74 crores received by him. Further,
admit apart from this business transaction, they have no further
business.
6. In view of the same, the petitioners depositing a sum
20% compensation would amount to admit liability of the
petitioners. In the business transaction it is common, usual practice
that signed cheques are given as security. The petitioners confirms
the liability of Rs.1.26 crores alone. Though there is some dispute
with regard to the interest part of it which is to to be decided in the
civil suit in CS.No.545 of 2015. The Civil Court would be
appropriate Court to fix the liability of the parties. The trial Court
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
has not given any reason, how compensation amount to Rs.7.7
crores arrival as fixed. The Court not gone into these aspects
despite specific ground taken and arguments advanced on these
limits without consideration and directed the petitioners to deposit
20% of the compensation amount.
7. In view of the same, this Court finds despite the
specific grounds of the petitioner that Rs.9.2 crores paid so far. The
respondent's admission is that they have received a sum of Rs.8.74
crores. Going by the respondent/complainant, admission the
petitioners to pay Rs.1.26 crores, of which, 20% is Rs.25 lakhs.
The Apex Court in the judgment referred supra, held in exceptional
cases for special reasons it can be reduced or waived. On the facts
and earlier this Court finds this case is one such exceptional one.
8. In view of the same, the petitioner is directed to
deposit a sum of Rs.25 lakhs as compensation amount, giving
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
liberty to the respondent/complainant to withdraw the Rs.25 lakhs.
Of course with an understanding subject to outcome of appeal in
C.A.No.199 of 2021. The direction of the Sessions Court to the
petitioner to pay 20% of the compensation amount as per Trial
Court judgment is alone modified and the other conditions shall
remain unchanged. The petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs.25
lakhs to the credit of C.C.No.5702 of 2016 before the Metropolitan
Magistrate, FTC-I, Egmore @ Allikulam, Chennai.
9. In view of the same, the petitioner is directed to
deposit a sum of Rs.25 lakhs within 15 days from the date of the
order or normal functioning of the Court, before the Trial Court.
10. With the above directions, this Criminal Original
Petition is accordingly modified. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
27.01.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
dna
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
dna
To
1.The Principal Sessions Court, Chennai
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
CRL.O.P.No.1441 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P.No.587 of 2022
27.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
