Madras High Court
V.Ramadoss vs M.Kandhan on 7 July, 2023
Crl.O.P.No.15044 of 2023
in Crl.A.SR.No.15862 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.07.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
CRL.O.P. No.15044 of 2023
in
Crl.A.SR.No.15862 of 2023
V.Ramadoss ... Petitioner
Versus
M.Kandhan ... Respondent
Prayer in Crl.O.P.No.15044 of 2023: Criminal Original Petition
filed under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to grant Special
Leave and permit the petitioner to prosecute the above appeal filed against the
order of acquittal dated 30.11.2022 made in S.T.C.No.79 of 2018 on the file of
the Fast Track at Magistrate Level, Thiruvallur.
Prayer in Crl.A.SR.No.1586 of 2023: Criminal Appeal filed under
Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the order of
acquittal dated 30.11.2022 made in STC.No.79 of 2018 on the file of the Fast
Track at Magistrate Level, Thiruvallur.
For Petitioner : Mr. M. Mohamed Riyaz
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 6
Crl.O.P.No.15044 of 2023
in Crl.A.SR.No.15862 of 2023
ORDER
The present Criminal Original Petition is filed to grant leave for
filing an appeal against the Judgment passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Fast Track at Magistrate Level, Thiruvallur, in S.T.C. No. 79 of
2018 dated 30.11.2022.
2.The case of the complainant in nutshell is as follows:
The respondent/accused is well known to the complainant. The
accused was working in HVF Company at Avadi. During the year 2012, the
respondent/accused approached the complainant, and promised him to secure a
job for his three sons, namely, R.Sathish Kumar, R.Santhosh Kumar, and
R.Gopinath in the said Company and demanded Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten
Lakhs Only). The complainant, in order to secure a job for his three sons, paid
a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- on different dates. However, the respondent/accused
did not secure the job as promised by him. Hence, the complainant demanded
repayment of the amount. After repeated demands, the accused issued a
cheque bearing No.606752 dated 16.07.2018 drawn on State Bank of India at
Avadi Branch for a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- and promised to repay the balance
amount of Rs.1,00,000/- within a period of three months. When the
complainant presented the said cheque dated 27.07.2018 with his banker, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.15044 of 2023
in Crl.A.SR.No.15862 of 2023
Indian Overseas Bank, Thiruninravur branch, it was returned for the reason
that “payment stopped by drawer”. Therefore, the complainant issued a legal
notice (Ex.P4) on 28.08.2018 to the respondent/accused demanding the latter
to make good the payment. On receipt of the notice dated 28.08.2018, the
accused sent a reply notice dated 01.10.2018 denying his liability. According
to the complainant all the allegations contained in the reply notice (Ex.P6) are
false, and therefore, he filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C.,
before the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level,
Thiruvallur, against the accused for the offence under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, and the same was taken on file as STC. No.79 of
2018.
3.Thereafter, the learned Trial Court Judge issued summons to the
accused for his appearance. Copies of documents were furnished to the
accused under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., and the substance of accusation made
against the accused were denied by him as false.
4.In the Trial Court, the complainant examined himself as P.W.1 and
marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P6. Thereafter, the accused was questioned under Section
313 of Cr.P.C., with regard to the circumstance appearing in evidence against
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.15044 of 2023
in Crl.A.SR.No.15862 of 2023
him and he denied of having committed any offence, the accused examined
himself as D.W.1 and marked Ex.D1 to Ex.D6.
5.The Trial Court after analysing the oral and documentary evidence
adduced on both sides held that though the respondent/accused admitted his
signature on the cheque, the purpose for which the money was lent to him,
illegal and also “Opposed to Public Policy”. Therefore, the Trial Court
acquitted the accused for the offence punishable offence under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act.
6.Heard, Mr. M. Mohamed Riyaz, learned Counsel for the
petitioner/complainant.
7.It is pertinent to point out that the complainant, even in his
complaint, had clearly stated that he paid a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs to the
respondent/accused on various dates for securing jobs for his three sons in
HVF Company at Avadi. The HVF Company, Avadi is a Central Government
enterprise and it is engaged in manufacturing Armoured vehicles and Battle
tanks. One has to undergo a Government prescribed recruitment process and to
secure a job paying money to some person employed in HVF Company, is a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.15044 of 2023
in Crl.A.SR.No.15862 of 2023
corrupt practice. The consideration in the instant case is only for unlawful
purpose and hence, as rightly observed by the Trial Court, the accused is liable
to be acquitted.
8.In the circumstances, the special leave petition is dismissed and
the Criminal Appeal is also dismissed at the SR stage itself.
07.07.2023
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order / Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
klt
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.15044 of 2023
in Crl.A.SR.No.15862 of 2023
R.HEMALATHA, J.
klt
CRL.O.P.No.15044 of 2023
in
Crl.A.SR.No.15862 of 2023
07.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
