Dismissed

Kr.Shanthi@Shanthi Karuppaiah v. J.Madhan Mohan

Madras HC26 Nov 2019CRL OP(MD)/218/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged lower courts' dismissal of applications seeking document production in a cheque bounce case. The High Court held no illegality occurred, affirmed the dismissal, and directed the trial court to conclude the trial within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitions dismissed. Trial directed to be completed within three months. Connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

Kr.Shanthi@Shanthi Karuppaiah Vs J.Madhan Mohan — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.218 & 219 of 2019)

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 26.11.2019 CORAM :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.218 & 219 of 2019 and Cr.M.P.(MD)Nos.79 & 80 of 2019

¶4

KR.Shanthi @ Shanthi Karuppaiah ... Petitioner/Accused (in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.218 of 2019) KR.Karuppiah ... Petitioner/Accused (in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.219 of 2019) Vs. J.Madhan Mohan ... Respondent/Complainant ( in both petitions)

¶5

Common Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to set aside the orders passed in Crl.R.C.Nos.48 & 49 of 2018 dated 24.09.2018 on the file of the III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Trichirappalli, confirming the orders passed in Crl.MP.Nos.4932 & 4933 of 2018 in C.C.Nos.177 & 178 of 2017 dated 14.08.2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Trichirappalli.

¶6

For Petitioners : Mr.V.Ilanchezian (in both petitions) For Respondent : Mr.R.Sundar (in both petitions)

¶7

COMMON ORDER

¶8

These petitions have been filed challenging the orders passed in Crl.R.C.Nos.48 & 49 of 2018 dated 24.09.2018 on the file of the III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Trichirappalli, by confirming the orders passed in Crl.MP.Nos.4932 & 4933 of 2018 in C.C.Nos.177 & 178 of 2017 dated 14.08.2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Trichirappalli.

¶9

2.The respondent filed a complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruchirapalli, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, as against the petitioners for dishonour of cheque drawn for a sum of Rs.1,46,16,000/-. At the time of trial, the petitioners filed petitions in Crl.MP.Nos.4932 & 4933 of 2018 in C.C.Nos.177 & 178 of 2017 under Section 91 of Cr.P.C. to direct the respondent to produce the documents viz., Account Books, Income Tax Returns, Statements of accounts, Auditors Reports and Bank Account statement for the Corresponding Accounts with regard to the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

1/2

¶11

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.218 & 219 of 2019)

¶12

transactions as alleged by the respondent in the complaint for the period of 01.04.2010 to 31.03.2017 and the same were dismissed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Trichirappalli without even issuing notice to the respondent. Against which, the petitioners preferred Crl.R.C.Nos.48 & 49 of 2018 before the III Additional District and Sessions Judge and the same were also dismissed as not maintainable. Hence, the petitioners approached this Court.

¶13

3.On perusal of the complaint, it reveals that in respect of the documents, which were demanded by the petitioners, no where connected with the proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, the learned Magistrate, rightly dismissed the application filed by the petitioners.

¶14

4.That apart, the respondent produced the statement of accounts for the concerned period before the trial Court along with the complaint. Hence, the learned District & Sessions Judge also dismissed the petitions in Crl.R.C.Nos.48 & 49 of 2018 and confirmed the orders passed in Crl.M.P.Nos.4932 & 4933 of 2018 in C.C.Nos.177 & 178 of 2017 dated 14.08.2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Trichirappalli.

¶15

5.Therefore, this Court does not find any illegality or infirmity in the orders passed by the Court below. Hence, these petitions are dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to complete the trial within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶16

Assistant Registrar (CS-III)

¶17

// True Copy //

¶18

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )

¶19

dss

¶20

¶21

The III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Trichirappalli.

¶22

Copy to: The Judicial Magistrate, Trichirappalli

¶23

+2 CC to Mr.R. SUNDAR, Advocate SR-101411, 101413 +2 CC to Mr.V. ILLANCHEZIAN, Advocate SR-101887, 101886

¶24

Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.218 & 219 of 2019 and Cr.M.P.(MD)Nos.79 & 80 of 2019 26.11.2019

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ MK (18.12.2019) 2P 7C

¶26

2/2

Kr.Shanthi@Shanthi Karuppaiah v. J.Madhan Mohan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kr.Shanthi@Shanthi Karuppaiah v. J.Madhan Mohan

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

M.Marimuthu Vs The District Collector

Akilandam Vs Aparna

A. Edmund Vs the Inspector of Police

Nirmala Devi Vs Muthukumar

M.Sujith Vs The Inspetor of police

S.B.Paulsamy Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police