K.Selvaraj v. R.Ethiraj
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court of Madras dismissed criminal revision petition challenging orders condoning delay in filing Section 138 NI Act complaint. Court rejected claim of sufficient cause due to extra-ordinary delay and vested rights of accused.
What did the court decide?
Revision petition dismissed upholding order refusing condonation of delay of 356 days in filing Section 138 complaint.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ORDERS RESERVED ON ORDERS PRONOUNCED ON 12.08.2021 23.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
Crl.R.C.No.1283 of 2018
K.Selvaraj
.. Vs ..
R.Ethiraj .. Respondent/Accused
PRAYER : Petition filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, against the order dated 27.09.2018 made in C.M.P.No.4278 of 2018 in unnumbered C.C.No. of 2018, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.1, Coimbatore.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Anbazhagan
For Respondent : No Appearance
ORDER
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 356 days in filing complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be condoned on grounds of settlement talks.
Whether the right of the accused to immunity from prosecution has vested upon lapse of statutory notice period under Section 138.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K. Selvaraj
- respondent
R. Ethiraj
Coram
R.T. Teekaraman
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court