Disposed

P.Somasundaram, v. a.Vasanthamani

Madras HC9 Nov 2017CRL OP/6969/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the Court noted notice was not served on the accused. Relying on S. Ganapathy vs N. Senthil FB, it directed transfer of records to the Principal District and Sessions Judge for fresh service of notice.

What did the court decide?

Records sent to the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore for fresh service of notice.

P.Somasundaram, Vs a.Vasanthamani — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED 09.11.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.6969 of 2017 in Crl.A.No.SR.3734 of 2017

P.Somasundaram

.... Petitioner

A.Vasanthamani

.... Respondent

Petition filed under Section 378 (4) of Criminal Procedure Code against the Order of the Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Pollachi, Coimbatore District made in S.T.C.No.1964 of 2014 dated 22.12.2016.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Veeraraghavan

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

For the sake of convenience, the petitioner and the respondent will be referred to as the complainant and the accused respectively.

¶16

The complainant initiated a prosecution in S.T.C.No.1964 of 2014 against the accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in which, the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Pollachi, Coimbatore District, acquitted the accused by the order dated 22.12.2016, aggrieved by which, the complainant has preferred the present appeal with the Special Leave Petition.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the complainant.

P.N. PRAKASH,J.,

cla

On a perusal of the records, it is seen that notice has not been served

¶22

on the accused.

¶23

In view of the judgment of a Full Bench of this Court in S. Ganapathy vs N. Senthilvel [ (2016) 3 MLJ (Crl) 641 (FB)], the Registry is directed to send the records relating to this case to the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore after taking a photocopy of the records, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶24

The complainant is directed to appear before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore on 11.12.2017 at 10.30 a.m.

¶25

With the above direction, the criminal original petition is disposed of. Consequently, Criminal Appeal SR No.3734 of 2017 is closed.

¶26

09-11-2017

¶27

Speaking/Non-Speaking Order Index:yes/no

¶28

¶29

The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

¶30

The Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Pollachi, Coimbatore District .

¶31

Crl.O.P.No.6969 0f 2017 in Crl.A.No.SR.3734 of 2017

P.Somasundaram, v. a.Vasanthamani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Somasundaram, v. a.Vasanthamani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. N. Lakshmi, Age 65 Years, Vs v. Ramaraj, Age 55 Years

Mrs. N. Lakshmi, Age 65 Years, Vs v. Ramaraj, Age 55 Years

M/S.First Techno Services Pvt. Vs P.v.Achuthan

K.Muthusamy M/65 Years Vs S.K.Parthasarathy M/58 Years

K.Haribabu, M/54 Years Vs M.Kulasekaran, M/60

State Represented by Vs Chinnadurai, M/A-36/2010