Madras High Court
V.S.Dinakar vs M/S.Sonigra Sales Corporation on 1 August, 2024
Author: G.Jayachandran
Bench: G.Jayachandran
Crl.O.P.No.18382 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.08.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
Crl.O.P.No.18382 of 2024
V.S.Dinakar ... Petitioner
Vs.
M/s.Sonigra Sales Corporation,
Represented by its Managing Director
and by its Authorized Signatory,
Deepak Kumar ... Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal
Procedure Code, pleased to call for the records in Crl.M.P.No.18261 of
2024 in C.A.No.476/2024 (now pending on the file of the learned XVII
Judge, Chennai) and set aside the order of the learned Principal Sessions
Judge, Chennai passed in Crl.M.P.No.18261 of 2024 dated 04.07.2024.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Ravishankar Vallatharasu
ORDER
The petitioner herein was found guilty by the Metropolitan
Magistrate Fast Track Court II, Chennai, for an offence under Section
138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to undergo 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
months Simple Imprisonment and pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-.
On the date of judgment, the petitioner did not appear and therefore,
warrant was issued against him by the trial Court.
2. Challenging the order passed in S.T.C.No.2122 of 2022, the
petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal before the Principal Sessions
Judge, Chennai in Crl.A.No.476/2024. Along with appeal, he has
preferred an application for suspension of sentence. The lower appellate
Court has dismissed the application for suspension of sentence on the
ground that on the date of judgment, the petitioner was absent and Non
Bailable Warrant was issued against him and the same is pending. Hence
sentence cannot be suspended without the convict present personally
before the trial Court and surrender. Challenging the same, the present
Criminal Original Petition is filed.
3. On perusing the records, this Court finds that as on date the
petitioner herein is an absconding convict and warrant is pending against
him. As pointed out by the lower appellate Court, it is appropriate for
him to surrender before the trial Court and seek further remedy. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petitioner cannot expect relief in extentia after defining the Court orders.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that
the petitioner is ready to deposit 20% of the compensation amount to
consider his application for suspension of sentence. If he is ready to
deposit 20% of the compensation amount, he may do so before the trial
Court and seek for recall of warrant and thereafter approach the lower
appellate Court for suspension of sentence in accordance with law.
5. In view the above, this Criminal Original Petition is
dismissed.
01.08.2024
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
rpl
To
1.The Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai
2.The XVII Judge, Chennai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
rpl
01.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
