High Court heard a criminal revision challenging conviction under Section 138 NI Act for bounced cheque. Court credited defence evidence of partners coercion. Revision allowed, conviction set aside, and accused acquitted.
Revision allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Bail bonds cancelled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Bail Slip
That the appellant/Accused namely P. Lakshmanan, S/o. Palaniappa Gounder, was released on bail by the order dated 29.04.2011 made in MP.No.1 of 2011 in Crl.R.C.No.701 of 2011.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.08.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM
Crl.R.C.No.701 of 2011
P.Lakshmanan S/o.Palaniappa Gounder
J.Pasupathy S/o.T.L.Jaganathan
Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. against the judgment of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Namakkal, passed in C.A.No.81 of 2009 on 14.03.2011 modifying the judgment of learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchengode, passed in C.C.No.16 of 2002 on 29.09.2009.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Gouthaman
For Respondent : Mr.M.R.Jothimanian
O R D E R
This revision arises against the judgment of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Namakkal, passed in C.A.No.81 of 2009 on 14.03.2011 modifying the judgment dated 29.09.2009 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchengode, in C.C.No.16 of 2002.
presentation, returned unpaid for the reason “insufficient funds”. Respondent/complainant caused statutory notice and following the procedure envisaged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a complaint had been filed.
Sd/-
Deputy Registrar(CS)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kmi
To
1.The Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Namakkal.
2.The Judicial Magistrate,
Thiruchengode.
3. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Namakkal.
+ 1 cc to Mr.R. Nalliyappan, Advocate SR.60073
Crl.R.C.No.701 of 2011
NM(CO)
EU(22/11/2017 )
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the defence evidence regarding coercive issuance of the cheque requires independent appreciation.
Whether benefit of doubt should be afforded to the accused in a cheque dishonour case based on partner's testimony.
Whether the impugned conviction and sentence can be quashed in the public interest.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
P. Lakshmanan
J. Pasupathy
C.T. SELVAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
