Friday, 15, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

S.Manohar vs M.Velayutham
2025 Latest Caselaw 2360 Mad

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2360 Mad
Judgement Date : 3 February, 2025

Madras High Court

S.Manohar vs M.Velayutham on 3 February, 2025

Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
                                                                                      Crl.O.P.No.2636 of 2025


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    DATED: 03.02.2025

                                                            CORAM:

                            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

                                                  Crl.O.P.No.2636 of 2025
                                                and Crl.M.P.No.1701 of 2025

                S.Manohar                                                ... Petitioner

                                                              Vs

                M.Velayutham                                             ... Respondent
                PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under 528 of the Bharatiya
                Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to set aside the order dated 04.12.2024 made in
                Crl.M.P.No.3934 of 2024 in S.T.C.No.985 of 2021 passed by the Learned XV
                Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
                                           For Petitioner    : Mr.S.Sathish Rajan

                                                            ORDER

This petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 04.12.2024

made in Crl.M.P.No.3934 of 2024 in S.T.C.No.985 of 2021 passed by the

Learned XV Court of Small Causes, Chennai, thereby dismissing the

application filed by the petitioner under Section 91 Cr.P.C.

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

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials

placed on record.

3. The petitioner is an accused in the complaint lodged by the

respondent in S.T.C.No.985 of 2021, on the file of the XV Court of Small

Causes, Chennai alleging that the petitioner borrowed huge sum and in order to

return the same, issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- towards part

settlement of the loan borrowed by him. It was presented for collection and got

dishonoured. After issuance of statutory notice as contemplated under Section

138 of NI Act, filed complaint.

4. After examination of witnesses, the petitioner filed an application

under Section 91 Cr.P.C to produce the bank statement of the respondent, on

the ground that he had no financial source to lend such a huge amount as loan

to the petitioner. Further, he is working as a Manager in a Hotel and as such, he

had no source of such income to lend huge amount of loan to the petitioner.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the Judgment of

the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in 2022 6 SCC 735 in the case of

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

Tedhi Singh Vs Narayan Dass Mahant, in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court

of India held that the complainant need not show in the first instance that he

had the capacity to lend loan, since Section 138 of NI Act is not a civil dispute.

The complaint has been filed to punish the petitioner. When the complainant

gives his evidence, unless a case is set up in the reply notice to the statutory

notice sent, that the complainant did not have the wherewithal, it cannot be

expected of the complainant to initially lead evidence to show that he had the

financial capacity. However, the accused has the right to demonstrate that the

complainant in a particular case did not have the capacity and therefore, the

case of the accused is acceptable which he can do by producing independent

materials. It is also open to him to establish the very same aspect by pointing to

the materials produced by himself.

6. A perusal of records revealed that the petitioner was also

examined as defence witness and however, he did not produce any material to

substantiate the said ground. That apart, the case is posted for arguments, after

closing evidence. Therefore, the Trial Court had rightly dismissed the petition

and this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order dated 04.12.2024

made in Crl.M.P.No.3934 of 2024 in S.T.C.No.985 of 2021 passed by the

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

Learned XV Court of Small Causes, Chennai and this petition is devoid of

merits and is liable to be dismissed. The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the

complaint in S.T.C.No.985 of 2021, within a period of twelve weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed.

03.02.2025 (3/4)

Internet:Yes Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order

mn

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

To

1. The XV Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

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

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,

mn

03.02.2025

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

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter