Ayyalusami vs K.Rengammal ... 1St
2023 Latest Caselaw 8870 Mad

                                                                        Crl.R.C.(MD).No.780 of 2023

                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                               Dated : 24.07.2023

                                                     CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN

                                         Crl.RC(MD)No.780 of 2023
                                                   and
                                        Crl.MP(MD)No.10583 of 2023


                Ayyalusami                               ... Petitioner/1st Respondent/
                                                                    1st Accused
                                               Vs.
                1.K.Rengammal                            ... 1st Respondent/Petitioner/
                                                                    Complainant

                Murugan @ Mangalam Murugan (Died)

                2.Maadathi                                ... 2nd Respondent/3rd Respondent/
                                                                       3rd Accused
                3.Anandha Sudharsan                       ... 3rd Respondent/4th Respondent/
                                                                      4th Accused

                PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401
                of Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the order dated 14.12.2020 made in
                Cr.M.P.No.1708 of 2020 in C.C.No.52 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial
                Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti and allow the Criminal Revision Petition.


                                   For Petitioner     : Mr.R.Sankar

                                   For R1             : Mr.J.Antony Arul Raj

                1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                           Crl.R.C.(MD).No.780 of 2023

                                                       ORDER

This Criminal Revision is filed to set aside the impugned Judgment passed

by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti, in Cr.M.P.No.1708 of 2020

in C.C.No.52 of 2016 dated 14.12.2020.

2.The first respondent in this Revision filed C.C.No.52 of 2016 before the

learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti, to take action against the petitioner

and the respondents 2 & 3 and other persons.

3.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the case was

transferred to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Oottapitaram.

4.According to the learned counsel for the first respondent, the petitioner

and the other accused persons said to have forged the document (Ex.C1) dated

02.04.2008. Now, the petitioner is alleged to be abused the said document. Now,

the first respondent in order to prove the case filed a petition in Crl.MP.No.1708

of 2020 under Section 45 of Evidence Act for comparison of signature of the

first respondent and the same was allowed by the learned Judicial Magistrate

No.II, Kovilpatti, by the impugned order dated 14.12.2020. The same was

challenged by the petitioner in the memorandum of grounds of Revision.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.(MD).No.780 of 2023

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without

considering the contemporary period of document and without considering the

objection raised by the petitioner, the learned Judicial Magistrate allowed the

petition. Hence, he seeks indulgence of this Court to set aside the impugned

order passed by the learned trial Judge.

6.Per contra, the learned counsel for the first respondent would submit that

now, the expert opinion was obtained and the same was pending before the

Court. He also produced a copy of the same before this Court. In the said

circumstances, he prays for dismissal of this Revision.

7.This Court considering the rival submission and also perused the records

annexed in the typed set of papers and also the expert opinion produced by the

learned counsel for the first respondent.

8.Admittedly, as per order of the learned trial Judge, no counter was filed.

Hence, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct. But,

according to the petitioner, the learned trial Judge has not considered the oral

submission regarding the contemporary period of document. According to the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.(MD).No.780 of 2023

first respondent, the said document dated 02.04.2008 was forged by the

petitioner and the other accused persons. In the said allegation, the learned trial

Judge by the impugned order dated 14.12.2020, correctly directed the concerned

authority to compare the signature and submit a report and hence, there is no

merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

9. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the

petitioner, this Court is inclined to dispose this Revision with the following

direction:-

The learned Judicial Magistrate No.II. Kovilpatti, is directed to mark the

said disputed document after considering the objection raised by the petitioner

regarding the contemporary period of document and the opinion of the hand

writing expert in accordance with law and complete the trial within a period of

six months from the date of next hearing date. Consequently, the connected

miscellaneous petition is closed.

24.07.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No dss

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.(MD).No.780 of 2023

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti.

2.The Section Officer, Criminal Record, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.(MD).No.780 of 2023

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

dss

Crl.RC(MD)No.780 of 2023 and Crl.MP(MD)No.10583 of 2023

24.07.2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis