Madras High Court
M.Palanichamy : Revision vs P.T.Soundarapandian on 14 November, 2022
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated: 14/11/2022
CORAM
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN
Crl.RC(MD)No.788 of 2022
and
Crl.MP(MD)No.9785 of 2022
M.Palanichamy : Revision Petitioner/
Appellant/Accused
Vs.
P.T.Soundarapandian
S/o.P.P.Thangavelu,
Managing Partner,
Sri Pandian Batteries,
D.No.256J/8 M.V.G. Buildings,
By-Pass Road,
Petaniapuram, Madurai.
Represented by its Power of Attorney
Dinakaran : Respondent/Respondent/
Complainant
Prayer:- This Revision has been filed under
section 397 r/w 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code to
call for the records in CA No.125 of 2019 dated
19/03/2020 by the VI Additional District & Sessions
Judge, Madurai, by confirming the judgment in STC No.198
of 2017 on the file of the Fast Track Court No.II
(Judicial Magistrate), Madurai, dated 30/09/2019 and duly
set aside the judgment of the courts below by acquitting
the revision petitioner and pass such further or other
orders.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
For Petitioner : M/s.N.Juliet Latha
For Respondent : No appearance
O R D E R
This revision has been filed seeking to set aside
the judgment, dated 19/03/2020 in CA No.125 of 2019
passed by the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Madurai, confirming the judgment, dated 30/09/2019 in STC
No.198 of 2017 passed by the Fast Track Court No.II
(Judicial Magistrate), Madurai.
2.It is a private complaint instituted on the
basis of the offence alleged to be committed under
section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
3.The facts in brief:-
The accused is running a company called 'Balaji
Battery Agency' at Karaikudi. The complainant is the
power of attorney holder of the company called 'Sri
Pandian Batteries' having business transaction with the
accused company. Towards the above said business
transaction, an amount of Rs.2,87,000/- was due to be
paid by the accused. Towards the discharge of the above
said balance, the accused has issued six cheques bearing
various numbers on various dates for about Rs.87,735/-.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Those cheques were presented for payment. They were
returned as stop payment order has been issued by the
accused. After completing the formalities, the complaint
was filed before the trial court.
4.On the side of the accused, one witness was
examined and 13 documents were marked. On the side of the
accused, two witnesses were examined and 6 documents
marked.
5.At the conclusion of the trial, the trial court
found that the offence under section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act stands proved and accordingly,
convicted and sentenced the revision petition to undergo
3 moths simple imprisonment and the payment of
Rs.87,735/- was ordered as compensation under section 357
Cr.P.C. Against which, the appeal has been preferred and
the appeal was also dismissed by the 6th Additional
Sessions Judge, Madurai, in C.A No.125 of 2019, on
19/03/2020.
6.Challenging the above said concurrent findings
of the courts below, this criminal revision has been
preferred by the accused.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7.At the time of revision, the learned counsel
appearing for the revision petitioner has stated that the
above said matter was settled between the parties out of
court and he has also paid the entire amount, which was
due to the complainant, on 25/05/2022. To show the same,
he has also produced the receipt, which was issued by the
complainant, who is the power of attorney holder of the
Sri Pandian Batteries, Madurai.
8.Reading of the receipt shows that the above
said amount was settlement out of the court and the
entire amount has also been received from satisfaction
and full quit. But however, there is no representation
for the respondent. Notice was ordered to the respondent
to inform the court about the settlement. Even though,
the notice has been received, there is no representation
either in person or through counsel. So his name was
printed in the cause list.
9.Since no contra statement has been made by the
respondent to the effect that there was no compromise out
of the court and the entire amount has been settled. So,
I am of the considered view that the matter can be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
disposed of in terms of settlement, that was reached
between the parties. He was directed to deposit 5% of the
cheque amount to the credit of the High Court Legal
Services Authority, attached to this Bench and that
amount was also deposited and the receipt was also
produced to prove the same.
10.In view of the above said development, without
going into the merits of the case, this criminal revision
is allowed and accordingly, the judgment of conviction
and sentence passed by the trial court as well as the
first appellate court are hereby set aside and the
revision petitioner is acquitted of the charges levelled
against him. The fine amount, if any paid shall be
refunded to the revision petitioner. Consequently,
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
14/11/2022
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
er
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To,
1.The Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Madurai.
2.The Fast Track Court No.II,
(Judicial Magistrate),
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.ILANGOVAN,J
er
Crl.RC(MD)No.788 of 2022
14/11/2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
