Disposed

T.L.Narayanan v. G.Kannan

Madras HC6 Dec 2017CRL A/958/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held, relying on S.Ganapathy Vs. N.Senthilvel, that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain these criminal appeals against acquittals in cheque dishonour cases. Appeals were transmitted to the District Judge, Tiruvannamalai, for disposal.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeals were disposed of, and papers were ordered transmitted to the District Judge, Tiruvannamalai for disposal.

T.L.Narayanan Vs G.Kannan — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :06.12.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA

¶6

Crl.A.Nos. 958 to 961 of 2006
T.L.Narayanan ... Appellant
(in Crl.A.Nos.958 to 960 of 2006)
L.Harikrishnan ... Appellant
(in Crl.A.No.961 of 2006)
Vs.
G.Kannan ... Respondent
(in Crl.A.Nos.958 to 960 of 2006)
A.Soundararajan ... Respondent
(in Crl.A.No.961 of 2006)

¶7

Criminal Appeals filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal

¶8

Procedure to set aside the orders of acquittal of the respondents / accused

¶9

dated 17.08.2006 in C.C.Nos.150, 151, 152 & 154 of 2006, before the

¶10

learned Judicial Magistrate, Arni, respectively.

¶11

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶12

¶13

For Appellants : Mr.G.Paranthaman
(in all the Crl.Appeals)
For Respondents : No appearance
(in all the Crl.Appeals)
C O M M O N J U D G E M E N T
For the sake of convenience, the appellants and the respondents are
referred to as complainants and accused.

¶14

The complainants initiated prosecutions in C.C.Nos.150, 151, 152 & 154 of 2006, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Arni, for the alleged offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Act, against the accused, in which, the accused were acquitted by judgments dated 17.08.2006 aggrieved by which, the complainants are before this Court.

¶15

In view of the Judgment of a Full Bench of this Court in S.Ganapathy Vs. N.Senthilvel [ (2016) 3 MLJ (Crl.) 641 (FB) ] , this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain these appeals and therefore, the

¶16

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶17

¶18

Registry is directed to transmit all the papers relating to these appeals to the learned District Judge, Tiruvannamalai, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after retaining the photocopies of the same on file.

¶19

The complainants and the accused are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Tiruvannamalai, on 24.01.2018 at 10.30 a.m. 5. Since, the complaints are of the year 2006, the learned District Judge, Tiruvannamalai, is directed to dispose of the Criminal Appeals as early as possible. 6. With the above observation, the present Criminal Appeals stand disposed of. 06.12.2017 Speaking/Non speaking order Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No ms

¶20

http://www.judis.nic.in

R. HEMALATHA.J.,

The Judicial Magistrate,
Arni
2. The District Judge,
Tiruvannamalai.
Crl.A.Nos. 958 to 961 of 2006

¶26

06.12.2017

¶27

http://www.judis.nic.in

T.L.Narayanan v. G.Kannan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.L.Narayanan v. G.Kannan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.P.Suryaprakasam, Vs The Chief Secretary to

Fisherman Care, Reg. Asso. Vs Union of India, rep. by the

M/S.Shriram Transport Vs Mohammed Farook

M/S.S.v.Nagar Benefit Fund Vs U.Shahul Ameed

The Sub Registrar, Vs N.Madhorubagan

B.Saravanan Vs R.Ponmudi