Madras High Court
Sujatha vs Thangaraj on 4 February, 2025
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.A.No.246 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.02.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.A.No.246 of 2022
Sujatha ... Appellant
Vs.
Thangaraj ... Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378(4) of Code of Criminal
Procedure, to allow the above Criminal Appeal by setting aside the order
dated 25.11.2021 passed in C.C.No.200 of 2019 on the file of the Court of
the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court (Magisterial Level) at
Tiruvannamalai.
For Appellant : Mr.C.Vigneswaran for
Mr.K.Govi Ganesan
For Respondent : No Appearance
Page No.1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.A.No.246 of 2022
JUDGMENT
The appellant as a complainant filed a private complaint for offence
under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in C.C.No.200 of
2019 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court (ML),
Tiruvannamalai (Trial Court). The Trial Court by judgment, dated
25.11.2021 had dismissed the said complaint for non-prosecution. Against
which, the present criminal appeal has been filed.
2.Private notice taken to the respondent returned for the reason
'Unclaimed' but intimation served and thereafter the name of the respondent
printed in the cause list. Despite the same, no representation for the
respondent either in person or by any counsel.
3.The contention of the appellant is that the respondent who was
working as Cane Assistant in Kallakurichi Cooperative Sugar Mills, had
borrowed a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- from the appellant and promised to repay
the said amount within a short period. In discharge of the said liability, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
respondent issued a cheque bearing No.000103 drawn on Karur Vysya
Bank, Perunthuraipattu Branch to the appellant which got dishonoured on
15.03.2019 for the reason 'Funds Insufficient'. Following the statutory
provision, a complaint has been filed before the Trial Court.
4.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that before the Trial
Court, the appellant could not be appeared on certain days due to her health
ailments which got aggravated after COVID-19. The appellant is a woman,
her entire savings of Rs.3,50,000/- was wiped out due to non-payment of the
respondent. The Trial Court without considering the health condition of the
appellant, dismissed the complaint for non-prosecution recording her date of
absence. He would further submit that only after ful-fledged trial, real
justice can be rendered and not by dismissing the complaint on technical
grounds, which is nothing but terminating the complaint by short-circuit
method.
5.Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is
seen that the complaint filed by the appellant dismissed on technical
grounds, not on merits and that further keeping the revision for service of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
notice to the respondent would serve no purpose since the dismissal of the
complaint is not on merits. No prejudice will be caused.
6.In view of the above, the judgment, dated 25.11.2021 in
C.C.No.200 of 2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track
Court (ML), Tiruvannamalai is set aside and the complaint in C.C.No.200 of
2019 is restored to the file of the Trial Court.
7.The Trial Court is directed to take the complaint on file, issue
process, ensure the presence of the respondent, proceed with the trial and
complete the trial within a period of four months from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order. This four months is only an outer limit.
8.In the result, this criminal appeal stands allowed.
04.02.2025
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
vv2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
The Judicial Magistrate,
Fast Track Court (ML),
Tiruvannamalai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
vv2
04.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
