Allowed

L.Madeswaran, Aged 48 Years, v. Raajhammal, Aged 42 Years

Madras HC5 Apr 2019CRL OP/7142/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court allowed a petitioner's Cr.O.P. filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Court permitted the petitioner to cross-examine a prosecution witness on their further examination and directed the lower court to complete trials within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to cross-examine P.W.1 on further examination; trial to be concluded within two weeks.

L.Madeswaran, Aged 48 Years, Vs Raajhammal, Aged 42 Years — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 05.04.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.7142 of 2018 &

¶6

Crl.M.P.No.3692 of 2018

¶7

L.Madeswaran, Proprietor ... Petitioner
L.Tex.,
.Vs.
Raajhammal, Proprietrix,
Raja Tex,
Rep. by her Power Agent
C.A.Yuvaraj ... Respondent

¶8

Prayer : Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure against the order dated 12.02.2018 made in C.M.P.No.716 of 2018 in S.T.C.No.382 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court No.I, Erode.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Guruprasad

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.A.Sundaravadhanam

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

This petition has been filed to challenge the order dated 12.02.2018 passed in C.M.P.No. 716 of 2018 in S.T.C.No.382 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.-I, Erode, thereby allowing the petition filed by the respondent/complainant under Section 31 1 of Cr.P.C. to recall P.W.1 for the purpose of further examination.

¶13

It is seen that the respondent lodged complaint as against the petitioner in S.T.C.No.382 of 2017 for the offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. When the case was posted for defence witnesses, the respondent/complainant filed a petition in C.M.P.No 716 of 2018 to recall P.W.1 for further examination. The trial Court by an

¶14

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

¶15

order dated 12.02.2018 allowed the said petition as against which the petitioner/accused filed this present petition.

¶16

It is also seen that since there is no interim order passed by this Court, the trial Court is proceeded with trial and matter has been posted for arguments today. During the trial, the petitioner also examined his witnesses as defence witnesses. But he did not cross examine P.W.1 on his further examination. Considering the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to cross examine P.W.1 on his further examination alone in the next hearing date. The trial Court is directed to permit the petitioner to cross examine P.W.1, in respect of further examination, within a period of one week from today and dispose of the case within a period of two weeks thereafter. If the petitioner fails to cross examine on the date fixed by the trial Court, the trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial in accordance with law.

¶17

With the above directions, this Criminal Original
Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.
nl
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate Court,
Fast Track Court No-I, Erode
2. -Do- Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Erode.
+1cc to Mr.M.Guruprasad, Advocate, SR.No.33539
Crl.O.P.No.7142 of 2018
Kak(05/04/2019)

¶18

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

L.Madeswaran, Aged 48 Years, v. Raajhammal, Aged 42 Years

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Madeswaran, Aged 48 Years, v. Raajhammal, Aged 42 Years

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

Krishna Kumar Vs Victoria Shanmuga Priya

R.M.Senthil Kumar Vs Hemalatha

M/S. Sree Vari Corporation Rep Vs S. Chockalingam

C.Balasubramanian, Vs The District Collector

M.Kannan Vs The District Collector

L.Madeswaran, M/a 48 Years, Vs C.a.Yuvaraaj