Allowed

S.Muralidharan v. The Commissioner

Madras HC3 Aug 2022WP/11970/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. challenging the dismissal of a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for cheque dishonour. Held, appeal allowed. Order set aside as no reference to settlement in written argument and complainant not heard. Directed to proceed within six months.

What did the court decide?

Order of acquittal dated 07.01.2020 set aside. Appellant directed to appear before the learned Magistrate on 31.10.2022. Complainant directed to file proof affidavit. Trial Judge directed to complete

S.Muralidharan Vs The Commissioner — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl. A. No.695 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 11.10.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

Crl.A. No.695 of 2022

¶7

M/s.K.K.Granitile Marketing Rep. by its Proprietor Mr.Gaurav Rajmal Tated S/o.Rajmal Gomchand Tated Aged about 37 years No15/16, Devangapet Street No.2 Near Flower Market Shivan Temple Adjacent Lane Coimbatore - 641 001

¶8

Rep. by its Special Power of Attorney Holder Mr.Rajmal Gomchand Tated S/o.Gomchand Tated Aged about 60 years D.No.199-2, Ward No.47 Sukrawarpet, Coimbatore - 641 001

¶9

.. Appellant

¶10

¶11

1.M/s.N.S.R.Tiles and Granites Rep. by its Proprietor Smt.Sudha W/o.Suresh Kumar No.8/1702E, Thiru Nagar Sadhasivam Avenue P.N.Road, Near Reliance Petrol Bunk Pooluvappatti Post Tiruppur - 641 602

¶12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

1/5

¶14

Crl. A. No.695 of 2022

¶15

2.Smt.Sudha W/o.Suresh Kumar Proprietor M/s.N.S.R.Tiles and Granites No.8/1702E, Thiru Nagar Sadhasivam Avenue P.N.Road, Near Reliance Petrol Bunk Pooluvappatti Post Tiruppur - 641 602 .. Respondents

¶16

¶17

Prayer : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the order of acquittal dated 07.01.2020 made in C.C. No.26 of 2020 on the file of the learned Judicial

¶18

Magistrate Fast Track Court No.1 @ Magisterial Level, Coimbatore.

¶19

¶20

For Appellant : Mr.S.Suresh For Respondents : No Appearance

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal arising out of the dismissal of the private complaint under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Though notice was served to the respondents, none appears for respondents.

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

2/5

¶25

Crl. A. No.695 of 2022

¶26

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that when he filed a private complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court No.1 @ Magisterial Level, Coimbatore under Section 200 Cr.P.C in C.C. No.26 of 2020 for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, on one of the hearing dates, the complainant could not appear and therefore, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint under Section 256 Cr.P.C. Before passing the dismissal order, the learned trial Judge did not give an opportunity or she has not sent a final notice before dismissing the complaint. Therefore, the order of the trial Judge warrants interference.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused

¶28

the materials available on record.

¶29

None appears on behalf of the respondents, despite notice was served and the name was printed. A perusal of the record shows that the complaint was dismissed for non appearance of the complainant, but not dismissed on merits. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Magistrate is set aside and the appeal is allowed and the appellant is directed to appear before the learned Judicial

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

3/5

¶32

Crl. A. No.695 of 2022

¶33

Magistrate Fast Track Court No.1 @ Magisterial Level, Coimbatore, on 31.10.2022 and proceed further in accordance with Law. The complainant is also directed to file his proof affidavit on that date and proceed further. The learned trial Judge is directed to proceed with the complaint in accordance with Law and directed to complete the proceedings and dispose of the complaint, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶34

11.10.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes Asr

¶35

¶36

The Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court No.1 @ Magisterial Level, Coimbatore

¶37

Note to office:

¶38

Issue Judgment copy on 12.10.2022.

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

4/5

¶41

Crl. A. No.695 of 2022

¶42

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

¶43

Asr

¶44

Crl.A. No.695 of 2022

¶45

Dated : 11.10.2022

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

5/5

S.Muralidharan v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Muralidharan v. The Commissioner

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/S..Sivasankar Real Assets Vs The District Collector

A.R.Viswanathan Vs The Commissioner

S.Saktheeswaran Vs The Commissioner

S.Sivasubramanian, Vs the Registrar of Co-Operative

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar Trust Vs D.S. Madhavan

Om Shri Ananda Sai Ram Vs The Commissioner