Dismissed

M/S. Jai Fire Works (P) Ltd. v. P. Shenbagarajan, S/O. N.P.P.S

Madras HC3 Dec 2020CRL RC(MD)/418/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court treated criminal revision petitions filed under Section 397 CrPC challenging convictions in Section 138 NI Act cases. Due to the death of one accused (abatement) and no fine imposed on the company, the court held nothing remained for adjudication against the company and dismissed the revisions.

What did the court decide?

Criminal revision petitions against M/s. Jai Fire Works (P) Ltd. were dismissed as nothing remained for adjudication; proceedings against the deceased accused were abated.

M/S. Jai Fire Works (P) Ltd. Vs P. Shenbagarajan, S/O. N.P.P.S — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

Crl.R.C.(MD)No.418 of 2016 etc Batch.,

¶2

Bail Slip

¶3

Petitioner/Accused namely P.M.Stalin was released on revision bail as per order of this Court dated 22.06.2016 made in Crl.MP(MD). NOs.4977, 4679, 4681, 4983, 4985, 4987, 4689, 4991, 4993, 6176 of 2016 in Crl.RC(MD).Nos.418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426 and 510 of 2016.

¶4

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.12.2020 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl.R.C.(MD)Nos.418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426 and 510 of 2016

¶5

1.M/s.Jai Fire Works (P) Ltd., Rep. through one of its Director P.N.Stalin, 38, V.K.M. Street, Near Nadar Lodge, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.

¶6

2.P.N.Stalin, Director, M/s.Jai Fire Works (P) Ltd., 3/77, PST Nagar, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.

¶7

... Petitioners in all Criminal Revision Petitions Vs.

¶8

P. Shenbagarajan, ... Respondent in CRL RC(MD). 418/ 2016 S. Sowbagyawathi, ... Respondent in CRL RC(MD). 419/ 2016 M/s. Swastic Industries, Power of Attorney of N. Raja

¶9

... Respondent in CRL RC(MD). 420/ 2016

¶10

G.C.Raveendran, Special Power of Attorney of M/s.Lajapathy Packer,

¶11

... Respondent in CRL RC(MD). 421/ 2016

¶12

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

¶13

1/3

¶14

Crl.R.C.(MD)No.418 of 2016 etc Batch.,

¶15

G. Murugan ... Respondent in CRL RC(MD). 422/ 2016

¶16

R.Dhanasekaran .. Respondent in CRL RC(MD). 423/ 2016

¶17

Venkateswara Paper Company Rep by its Proprietor, Mr.G.Balaji, Virudhunagar.

¶18

... Respondent in CRL RC(MD). 424/ 2016

¶19

Aruna Trading Company, A Partnership Firm, Rep. Through Power Agent, A. Rengaraj, Quilon - 2

¶20

... Respondent in CRL RC(MD). 425/ 2016 & 426/2016

¶21

G.C.Ravindran, Accountant and Special Power of Attorney of M/s. Lajapathiy Packer, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District

¶22

... Respondent in CRL RC(MD). 510/ 2016

¶23

Common Prayer in Crl.R.C.(MD)Nos.418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426 and 510 of 2016:

¶24

Criminal Revision Cases are filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C, to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the Principal Sessions Court, Virudhunagar District as Srivilliputtur in Crl.A.No.175, 172, 178, 180, 176, 181, 182, 173, 174, 179 of 2004 on 04.04.2016 in confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the Judicial Magistrate Court, Sivakasi in respective C.C.No.211, 212, 270, 515, 276, 301, 326, 81, 82, 522 of 2002 on 15.10.2004 and allow these criminal revision petition.

¶25

In All Cases:

¶26

For Petitioners: Mr.M.Jothi Basu

¶27

For Respondent : No appearance

¶28

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶29

All these criminal revision cases arise out of the private complaint instituted under Section 138 r/w 141 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The petitioners were convicted and sentence was also imposed. But then, during the pendency of these revision cases, the second petitioner namely, P.N.Stalin passed away. Therefore, the case against him automatically abates. That leaves us with the first petitioner namely, M/s.Jai Fire Works Private Limited. It is a incorporated company and therefore, the question https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of sentencing the same does not arise at all. The learned counsel

¶30

2/3

¶31

Crl.R.C.(MD)No.418 of 2016 etc Batch.,

¶32

for the revision petitioner would also state that the first petitioner appears to have wound up long back. It also appears that there are no properties standing in the name of the first petitioner. Be that as it may, the complainants also did not file any revision seeking a direction for payment of compensation by the company.

¶33

2.In these circumstances, in view of the demise of the second petitioner, the acquittal of other directors and non imposition of any fine or payment of compensation on the first petitioner, nothing further survives for adjudication. Confirming the conviction imposed on the first petitioner, these criminal revision cases are dismissed. I have already held that the proceedings stand abated as regards the second petitioner. It is of course open to the complainants to take appropriate action in accordance with law. The other rights and remedies of the complainants are left open.

¶34

// True Copy //

¶35

ias

¶36

Note :In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the Advocate/litigant concerned.

¶37

To:

¶38

+1 CC to Mr.M.JOthi Basu, Advocate ( SR-23963[F] dated 04/12/2020

¶39

Crl.R.C.(MD)Nos.418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426 and 510 of 2016

¶40

NR (22/12/2020) 3P : 4C

¶41

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

¶42

3/3

M/S. Jai Fire Works (P) Ltd. v. P. Shenbagarajan, S/O. N.P.P.S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Jai Fire Works (P) Ltd. v. P. Shenbagarajan, S/O. N.P.P.S

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

X. Victor De Rose Vs The Deputy Superintendent of police

M.Mani Vs the Inspector of Police

S. Jerold Vs the Superintendent of Police

R.Geetha Vs The Inspector of Police

R.Geetha Vs The Inspector of Police

Senthil @ Senthilkumar @ Vs the Inspector of Police