Allowed

S.R.Neraj v. D.Gunasekaran

Madras HC7 Jan 2019CRL MP/197/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, in a criminal miscellaneous petition arising from a cheque dishonour case, granted suspension of the substantive sentence imposed on the petitioner, allowing enlargement on bail subject to specific conditions including deposit of security money and execution of a bond. This decision was based on infirmities in the prosecution case and arguable points in the pending revisi

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended; enlargement on bail granted subject to deposit of Rs.1,25,000, execution of bond for Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and monthly appearance before the trial court.

S.R.Neraj Vs D.Gunasekaran — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Monday, the Seventh day of January Two Thousand Nineteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice V. PARTHIBAN

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.197 of 2019

¶7

IN CRL.RC.NO.28 OF 2019

¶8

S.R.NERAJ [ PETITIONER ]

¶9

¶10

D.GUNASEKARAN [ RESPONDENT ]

¶11

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the Memorandum of Grounds in Criminal Revision Case No.28 OF 2019 on the file of the High Court, the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence made in Crl.A.No.94 of 2016 in C.C.No.326 of 2013 MM FTC-II, Egmore Chennai which was confimed the sentence by the Learned XVIII Addl.Sess.Judge, Chennai dt 25.09.2018 pending disposal of the above Crl.R.C.NO.28 OF 2019.

¶12

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the Memorandum of Grounds in Crl.Revision Case No.28 OF 2019 on the file of the High Court and upon hearing the arguments of MR.S.A.AKBAR, Advocate for the petitioner the court made the following order:-

¶13

The petitioner/appellant was convicted for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo one year simple imprisonment and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months, by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.2, Egmore, Chennai, under judgment, dated 18.03.2016, in C.C.No.326 of 2013. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court was confirmed by the learned XVIII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, under judgment in C.A.No.94 of 2016, dated 25.09.2018. Hence, the petitioner seeks suspension of sentence.

¶14

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant would submit that there are several infirmities and inconsistencies found in the prosecution case. It is contended that there are contradictions in the material particulars between the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

3.In view of the fact that there are several infirmities in the prosecution case and there are arguable points involved in the revision, as contended by learned counsel for petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner herein is entitled to the relief of grant of suspension of sentence.

¶17

4.Accordingly, the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended and the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on the following conditions:

¶18

(i)The petitioner/appellant shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,25,000/(Rupees One Lakh Twenty Five Thousand only) to the credit of C.C.No.326 of 2013, on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.II, Egmore, Chennai, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

¶19

(ii)The petitioner/appellant/accused shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.II, Egmore;

¶20

(iii)The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m. pending disposal of the revision.

¶21

(iv)In case the conditions are not complied with, the interim order of suspension of sentence shall stand vacated automatically without further reference to this Court.

¶22

-sd/-

¶23

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶24

TRUE COPY

¶25

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶26

¶27

1 THE XVIII ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, CHENNAI.

¶28

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶29

2 THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, FAST TRACK COURT NO.II, EGMORE, CHENNAI.

¶30

3 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI. [FOR INFORMATION]

¶31

+1C.C. to M/S.S.A.AKBAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges in SR.NO. 472

¶32

Order
in
CRL MP.197/2019
in
CRL.RC.NO.28 OF 2019
Date :07/01/2019
From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified
copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format
MLT-09/01/2019

¶33

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.R.Neraj v. D.Gunasekaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.R.Neraj v. D.Gunasekaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Krishnaveni Vs M/S.Indian Overseas Bank

N.Gurunathan, Aged 36 Years Vs State Rep. by

P.Panchavarnam Vs R.Lakshmi

R.Shobha Vs Rajeswari

R.Shobha Vs Rajeswari

Varadhammal Vs State by