Dismissed

B.Latha v. C.Pradeep

Madras HC29 Jun 2021CRL OP/812/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that factual grounds raised in the petition required evidence appreciation and could not be decided under Section 482 CrPC. Consequently, the petition to quash the cheque dishonour proceedings was dismissed, and the lower court was directed to complete proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed, and the lower court was directed to complete the proceedings in C.C.No.114 of 2017 expeditiously.

B.Latha Vs C.Pradeep — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 29.06.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

CRL.O.P No.812 of 2018 and Crl.M.P No.270 of 2018

¶6

B. Latha W/o Balasubramaniam ...Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

C. Pradeep S/o Chandra Mohan .. Respondent

¶9

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the records in C.C.No.114 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate(Fast Track Court) Ambattur and quash the same.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S. Suresh

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.D.Murthy

¶12

This petition has been filed challenging the proceedings initiated by the respondents against the petitioner under Section 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶13

The grounds raised by the counsel for the petitioner are all factual in nature and it requires appreciation of evidence and this Court cannot decide the same in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code. It is left open to the petitioner to raise all the grounds before the Court and the same shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings pending before the Court below.

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court to dispense with the presence of the petitioner. Taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances of the case, the presence of the petitioner is dispensed with and he shall be represented by a counsel, who shall cross examine the witnesses on the same day, they are examined in Chief. The petitioner shall be present before the Court below at the time of questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C and at the time of passing

¶15

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

¶16

of the final judgement.

¶17

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed and the Court below is directed to complete the proceedings in C.C.No.114 of 2017, as expediously as possible Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶18

-s/d-

¶19

Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶20

True Copy

¶21

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶22

smn

¶23

¶24

The learned Judicial Magistrate(Fast Track Court), Ambattur.

¶25

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶26

CRL.O.P No.812 of 2018 and Crl.M.P No.270 of 2018

¶27

PCH(CO) SU(29/07/2021

¶28

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

B.Latha v. C.Pradeep

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Latha v. C.Pradeep

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

T.K.Prabakaran Vs State Rep.by

Balaji Vs State by Rep., .by

M.Kalaiselvi Vs the State Rep by

Arul, Aged 32 Years, Vs State by

P.Saraswathi Vs State Rep by

Rajendra Kumar K Jain Vs State Represented by