Madras High Court
R.Karkuzhali vs R.Sudhakara Reddy on 21 December, 2023
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.A.No.1636 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.12.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.A.No.1636 of 2023
R.Karkuzhali ... Appellant/Complainant
Vs.
R.Sudhakara Reddy ... Respondent/Accused
Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, to set aside the order dated 21.04.2023 made in
S.T.C.No.4083 of 2022 on the file of Fast Track Court No.II, Allikulam,
Egmore, Chennai and allow the above Criminal Appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Saravanakumar
For Respondent : Mr.M.S.Charles
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the order dated
21.04.2023 made in S.T.C.No.4083 of 2022 on the file of Fast Track Court
No.II, Allikulam, Egmore, Chennai and allow the above Criminal Appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2.The appellant as complainant has filed a private complaint under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent in
S.T.C.No.4038 of 2022. The Trial Court, by judgment dated 21.04.2023
dismissed the complaint for non prosecution and acquitted the respondent,
against which, the present appeal has been filed.
3.This Court, by order dated 18.12.2023 in Crl.O.P.No.27941 of
2023 granted leave and had given reasons for the same, which reads as
follows:
“3.The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner
had been diligently prosecuting the complaint. He had also
engaged an Advocate to prosecute the case. On two occasions,
i.e, on 18.07.2022 and 14.10.2022, the petitioner was not
present. Thereafter, he was present on 25.11.2022 and
10.02.2023. The summons is yet to be served to the respondent.
The respondent has been evading to receive the same. On
10.02.2023, the case was adjourned to 21.04.2023 but the
petitioner heard that the case was adjourned to 25.04.2023,
hence, he could not appear on 21.04.2023. For this reason, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
complaint was dismissed under Section 256 Cr.P.C.
4.The further contention of the petitioner is that the
accused is yet to appear before the Lower Court. The complaint
was not dismissed on merits but on technical ground it was
dismissed for non appearance of the petitioner/complainant.
5.It is seen from the petitioner's submission that prior to
21.04.2023, the petitioner appeared before the Trial Court on
25.11.2022 and 10.02.2023 and in the impugned order it has
been recorded that the petitioner absenting himself continuously
for several hearings, which is not correct. Substantial justice can
be done only after full-fledged trial and not by short circuiting of
dismissal of the complaint for non appearance. In this case, the
petitioner, previously appeared on two occasions and there is no
continuous absenteeism. The respondent is yet to appear before
the Lower Court.
6.Finding reason and force in the petitioner's submission,
this Court is inclined to grant leave. Accordingly, leave is
granted.”
4.It is seen that the respondent is yet to respond to the notice and
appear before the Trial Court. Since the respondent so far not appeared
before the Trial Court in S.T.C.No.4038 of 2022, no prejudice would be
caused to the respondent in the event of restoring the complaint. Hence,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
notice to the respondent is dispensed with.
5.In view of the above, the impugned order dated 21.04.2023 passed
by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.II, Egmore @
Allikulam, Chennai is set aside and the complaint in S.T.C.No.4038 of 2022
is restored on the file of Fast Track Court No.II, Egmore @ Allikulam,
Chennai. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed.
21.12.2023
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
rsi
To
1.The Metropolitan Magistrate,
Fast Track Court No.II,
Egmore @ Allikulam, Chennai.
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
rsi
21.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
