Allowed

Anbu Juliet v. R.K.Dayal

Madras HC28 Aug 2024CRL MP/11880/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted an extension of time to the petitioner to deposit Rs.8,40,000/- as a partial security in honor of a cheque. The petitioner was permitted to deposit the amount and execute a bond within two weeks of receiving the order copy.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the petitioner to deposit the Demand Draft for Rs.8,40,00/- and execute a bond within two weeks of receiving this order.

Anbu Juliet Vs R.K.Dayal — Madras HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Crl.M.P.No.11880 of 2024 in Crl.R.C.No.1762 of 2023

¶2

Crl.M.P.No.11880 of 2024 in Crl.R.C.No.1762 of 2023

¶3

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

¶4

This petition is filed to extend the time to comply with the condition of depositing the amount, imposed by this Court in Crl.M.P.No.16714 of 2023 in Crl.RC.No.1762 of 2023 by order dated 15.07.2024.

¶5

2.This Court by order dated 15.07.2024 directed the petitioner to deposit 30% of the cheque amount i.e., Rs.8,40,000/- to the credit of C.C.No.4537 of 2010 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.II, Egmore, Allikulam, Chennai within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and thereafter to appear before the Trial Court, execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court and further, directed the petitioner to appear before the Trial Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m. pending revision.

¶6

1/4

¶7

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

¶8

Crl.M.P.No.11880 of 2024 in Crl.R.C.No.1762 of 2023

¶9

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner applied for order copy and received the copy only on 29.07.2024 and by 09.08.2024, the period of two weeks got expired. She further submitted that the petitioner now made ready the amount of Rs.8,40,000/- and produced a Demand Draft for a sum of Rs.8,40,000/- drawn on Punjab National Bank in favour of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, vide DD.No.200585 dated 09.08.2024. In view of the lapse of time, the petitioner is unable to deposit the Demand Draft, execute the sureties and hence, seeks extension of time.

¶10

4.Considering the above submissions, the petitioner is directed to deposit the Demand Draft for a sum of Rs.8,40,000/- to the credit of C.C.No.4537 of 2010 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.II, Egmore, Allikulam, Chennai within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter to appear before the Trial Court, execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. The Trial Court is directed to receive the Demand Draft.

¶11

2/4

¶12

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

¶13

Crl.M.P.No.11880 of 2024 in Crl.R.C.No.1762 of 2023

¶14

5.This criminal miscellaneous petition is ordered accordingly.

28.08.2024

cse

3/4

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

¶19

Crl.M.P.No.11880 of 2024 in Crl.R.C.No.1762 of 2023

¶20

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

¶21

cse

¶22

Crl.M.P.No.11880 of 2024 in Crl.R.C.No.1762 of 2023

¶23

28.08.2024

¶24

4/4

¶25

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

Anbu Juliet v. R.K.Dayal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anbu Juliet v. R.K.Dayal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The India Cements Ltd., Vs M.S.Traders

G.P.Dhevikala Vs G.Manikandan

Ajithkumar Vs State Rep by

Dhanasekaran Vs Revathi

Devarajan Vs Divya

M/S. Venkatesh Coke and Power Ltd. Vs M/S.Mesuka Engineering Co.Pvt Ltd.