Madras High Court
S.Ramamoorthy vs State By Its on 20 January, 2022
CRL.O.P.No.726 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
CRL.O.P.No.726 of 2022
1.S.Ramamoorthy
2.R.Umamaheshwari ... Petitioners
Vs.
State by its
Inspector of Police,
Central Crime Branch,
VII Team, Chennai.
(Crime No.95 of 2013) ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, to modify the condition imposed in
Crl.M.P.No.5293 of 2021 in Crl.A.No.87 of 2021 dated 01.12.2021 on the
file of Principal District and Sessions Court, Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur
District.
For Petitioners : Mr. G.Mohanakrishnan
For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Additional Public Prosecutor
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.726 of 2022
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to modify the
condition imposed in Crl.M.P.No.5293 of 2021, in Crl.A.No.87 of 2021,
dated 01.12.2021, on the file of Principal District and Sessions Court,
Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioners were facing
trial in C.C.No.112 of 2014, for offences under sections 406 & 420 IPC.
The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, by judgment dated
01.11.2021, convicted the petitioners and sentenced them to undergo two
years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a sum of Rs.65,97,700/- as
compensation within a period of one month. Aggrieved over the same, the
petitioners preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.87 of 2021 and filed a
suspension of sentence petition in Crl.M.P.No.5293 of 2021. The lower
Court, in Crl.M.P.No.5293 of 2021 in Crl.A.No.87 of 2021, by an order
dated 01.12.2021, suspended the sentence of the petitioners and further
directed the petitioners to deposit 20% of the compensation amount before
the trial Court to the credit of C.C.No.112 of 2014 within a period of one
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.726 of 2022
month. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioners have filed this present
petition.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the first
petitioner is a private caterer, the second petitioner is a homemaker. The
second petitioner along with one Gnanasekaran conducted indigenous chit,
who suddenly committed suicide, due to which, the petitioners were
harassed to settle the chit amount. The second petitioner herself is a
scapegoat now. He further submits that the trial court not properly
appreciating the evidence had convicted the petitioners and imposed the
condition without giving any reason. In view of the same, the condition
imposed is an onerous one and the petitioners have got a good chance to
succeed in the appeal. If the compensation amount payable is not reduced
which would prove that the petitioners have admitted the offences and the
petitioners' chance of fair appeal would get affected. The appeal is a
statutory one.
4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the
petitioners along with one Gnanasekaran conducted indigenous chit.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.726 of 2022
Seventeen persons have been cheated to the tune of Rs.65,97,700/- and the
petitioners have given cheque for repayment of the chit amount but the
cheques got dishonoured. The witnesses have produced the materials and
they are running behind the petitioners to whom they have paid the money
and got cheated.
5.The learned counsel for the petitioners at this stage voluntarily
submits that without prejudice to their right in appeal, the petitioners are
willing to make Rs.5,00,000/- as deposit and make it clear that this amount
of Rs.5,00,000/- would not be considered as an admission in this case.
6.Considering the submissions, materials and the contention of the
petitioners that the trial Court had not given any reason for imposing the
condition of depositing 20% of the compensation amount seems to be
reasonable. It is not a case where there is a statutory condition of payment
of compensation amount while filing the appeal under Negotiable
Instruments Act. This case is under Sections 460 and 420 IPC. In view of
the same, this Court is not inclined to appreciate the act of the trial Court,
since the petitioners have voluntarily come forward to deposit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.726 of 2022
Rs.5,00,000/- to the credit of the C.C.No.112 of 2014 within one month
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order or the normal functioning of
the Court whichever is earlier.
7. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is disposed of.
20.01.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
sli
To
1.Inspector of Police,
Central Crime Branch,
VII Team, Chennai.
(Crime No.95 of 2013)
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.726 of 2022
sli
CRL.O.P.No.726 of 2022
20.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
