Madras High Court
J.Senthilkumar vs R.Mathanraj on 27 January, 2022
Crl.O.P(MD)No.1385 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.01.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
Crl.O.P(MD)No.1385 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.1032 and 1033 of 2022
1.J.Senthilkumar
2.S.Vijayalakshmi ... Petitioners
Vs.
R.Mathanraj ... Respondent
Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the complaint in STC.No.950
of 2021 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.5 at
Tiruchirapalli and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.U.Karunakaran
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P(MD)No.1385 of 2022
2.The petitioners are figuring as accused in S.T.C.No.950 of 2021
pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.V, Tiruchirapalli. It is a
case arising under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated all the
contentions set out in the memorandum of grounds. His primary
contention is that for carrying out NEFT operation, the consent of the
petitioners is necessary and that in the case on hand, such a consent was
not given. He would further contended that the complaint cheque was
presented with the banker of the petitioner and that the said branch will
not fall within the territorial jurisdiction of Judicial Magistrate No.V,
Tiruchirapalli. He further contend that the cheque appears to have been
obtained, when the first petitioner's father was alive and it has been
misused.
4.Contention Nos.1 and 3 advanced by the petitioners' counsel
involve contentious facts and therefore, they are left open to be decided
at the time of trial. As regards the contention No.2, liberty is given to the
petitioners herein to move the Principal Sessions Court, Tiruchirapalli
for transfer of case to the concerned Court. This criminal original
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P(MD)No.1385 of 2022
petition is dismissed. However, taking note of the overall facts and
circumstances, the personal appearance of the petitioners before the
Court below is dispensed with. However, the Court below will insist on
the personal appearance of the petitioners only on three occasions
namely, to answer the charge, for examination under Section 313 of
CrPC and at the time of pronouncing Judgment. On all other occasions,
the petitioners need not appear before the Court below. However, on
those occasions, the petitioners will have to be represented by their
counsel. If the petitioners' counsel is also absent, the benefit of
dispensing with the personal appearance of the petitioners will stand
automatically vacated. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions
are closed.
27.01.2022
Index :Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
ias
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be
utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy
of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be
the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To:
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.V,
Tiruchirappalli
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P(MD)No.1385 of 2022
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
ias
Crl.O.P(MD)No.1385 of 2022
27.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
