G.Mohan vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2727 Mad

Madras High Court

G.Mohan vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ... on 21 May, 2026

Author: R.Vijayakumar

Bench: R.Vijayakumar

                                                                        Crl.R.C.(MD)No.851 of 2026

                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                               DATED: 21.05.2026

                                                       CORAM:

                                  THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

                                           Crl.R.C.(MD)No.851 of 2026
                                                     and
                                          Crl.M.P.(MD).No.9921 of 2026

                1.G.Mohan

                2.G. Girija,

                3.G.Latha                                                      ... Petitioners

                                                         Vs
                State of Tamilnadu Rep By
                Inspector Of Police,
                Airport Police Station.
                Tiruchirappalli City,
                Tiruchirappalli.                                                 ... Respondent

                Prayer: This Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of
                BNSS, to call for the records and set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No. 78 of
                2026 in Crl.M.P. No. 10550 of 2022 in C.C. No. 1 of 2020 dt. 15.05.2026 on the
                file of the Learned Vacation Sessions Court, Tiruchirappalli and pass such
                further orders
                                     For Petitioners          : Mr.G.Balumahendran

                                     For Respondent           : Mr.Abul Kalam Azad
                                                                Government Advocate (crl.side)




                1/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                           Crl.R.C.(MD)No.851 of 2026

                                                         ORDER

The present petition has been filed by the accused person in C.C.No.1 of

2020 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy seeking to set

aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.78 of 2026 in Crl.M.P.No.10550 of 2022

in C.C.No.1 of 2020 dated 15.05.2026 on the file of learned Vacation Sessions

Court, Thiruchirappalli.

2. A perusal of the records reveals that the petitioners are the accused in

the above said case, charged with an offence punishable under Section 507 of

IPC. The petitioners filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition in Crl.M.P. No.

10550 of 2022 under Section 239 of Cr.P.C., seeking discharge from all charges.

The said petition was dismissed on 27.10.2025. Aggrieved by the same, the

petitioners preferred an appeal before the Vacation Court, Thiruchirappalli, with

a delay of 98 days. The application to condone the delay was dismissed by the

Appellate Court vide order dated 15.05.2026. Challenging the same, the present

revision petition has been filed.

3. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, though

the charge sheet was laid on 13.03.2020, due to Covid-19 pandemic, the

discharge petition was filed only in the year 2022 and the discharge petition was

disposed off on 27.10.2025. Thereafter, a revision petition was filed with a

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

delay of 98 days. Therefore, the finding of the First Appellate Court that the

petitioner had delayed the proceedings from 13.03.2020 till 18.12.2024 is

factually incorrect. Hence, he prayed for setting aside the order dated

15.05.2026 and for numbering the revision.

4. Heard the learned Counsels appearing on either side and perused the

materials available on record.

5. As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel appearing for the

petitioner, the discharge petition had been pending since 2022 and the same was

disposed of only on 27.10.2025. In such circumstances, the delay cannot be

attributed to the petitioner. Therefore, the First Appellate Court ought to have

considered and allowed the delay condonation petition. Therefore, citing the

delay caused during the pendency of the discharge petition, the application for

condonation of delay in filing the revision challenging the order of discharge

cannot be dismissed.

6. In view of the above said facts, the order impugned in the present

revision case is set aside and the delay stands condoned. The learned Appellate

Court is directed to number the Revision Petition and proceed further in

accordance with law.

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

7. With the above said observations, this Criminal Revision Case is

allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

21.05.2026 Index :yes/No Internet:yes/No gvn

To

1.The Vacation Sessions Court, Tiruchirappalli.

2. The Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy

3.The Inspector of Police, Airport Police Station, Tiruchirappalli City, Tiruchirappalli.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

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

R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

gvn

21.05.2026

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