Madras High Court
Swarnalatha vs M.Gothandapani on 27 October, 2022
Crl.R.C.No.1466 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.10.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.R.C.No.1466 of 2018
Swarnalatha ... Petitioner
Vs.
M.Gothandapani ... Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Revision case has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of
Cr.P.C, to set aside the conviction and sentence passed against the petitioner on
05.09.2018 in C.A.No.56 of 2016 on the file of the learned Additional District
Judge (FTC) Villupuram confirming the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate
No.1, Villupuram made in C.C.No.49 of 2011 dated 28.11.2016 and allow the
Criminal Revision Petition and acquit the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saravana Kumar
For Respondent : Mr.K.Kumar
ORDER
This Criminal Revision case has been filed as against the Judgment passed
in C.A.No.56 of 2016, dated 05.09.2018, on the file of the learned Additional
District Judge (FTC) Villupuram, thereby confirmed the order passed in
C.C.No.49 of 2011 dated 28.11.2016, on file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.1466 of 2018
Villupuram, thereby convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under
Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. The petitioner is an accused in the complaint lodged by the respondent
for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The
case of the prosecution is that on 04.09.2004, the petitioner borrowed a sum of
Rs.2,53,000/- from the respondent for her business purpose. In order to discharge
the said debt, the petitioner issued a cheque of a sum of Rs.2,53,000/-. It was
presented for collection and the same was returned dishonoured for the reason
“Exceeds Arrangements”. Immediately, the respondent caused statutory notice
and lodged a complaint.
3. On the side of the respondent, he was examined as P.W.1 and marked
Exs.P1 to P6. On the side of the petitioner, no one was examined and no
document was marked. On a perusal of oral and documentary evidence, the Trial
Court found the petitioner guilty and convicted the petitioner and sentenced her
to undergo six months simple imprisonment and also awarded compensation of
cheque amount. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal and
the same was dismissed confirming the order passed by the Trial Court. Hence,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.1466 of 2018
this revision.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner
had deposited 50% of the cheque amount to the credit of the Trial Court. Pending
the revision, the petitioner is willing to pay the remaining cheque amount, within
a period of four weeks.
5. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner,
the Judgment passed in C.A.No.56 of 2016, dated 05.09.2018, on the file of the
learned Additional District Judge (FTC) Villupuram, confirming the order passed
in C.C.No.49 of 2011 dated 28.11.2016, on file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1,
Villupuram, are hereby set aside, on condition that the petitioner shall pay the
remaining 50% of the cheque amount directly to the respondent by way of
Demand Draft, on or before 25.11.2022, failing which, the conviction and
sentence imposed by the Courts below stands automatically restored. On such
payment, the respondent is permitted to withdraw the amount which was already
deposited by the petitioner to the credit of the Trial Court, by way of filing
appropriate application. It is made clear that the Trial Court shall permit the
same, without ordering notice to the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.1466 of 2018
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision case stands allowed.
27.10.2022
(2/2)
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non speaking order
mn
To
1.The Additional District Judge (FTC) Villupuram.
2.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Villupuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.1466 of 2018
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,
mn
Crl.R.C.No.1466 of 2018
27.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
