Allowed

Shiney v. v.Saravana Kumar

Madras HC1 Oct 2024CRL RC/1681/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision petition regarding a conviction for cheque dishonour, the Madras High Court set aside the trial and appellate court judgments after accepting the compounding petition. The court ordered the petitioner's acquittal and immediate release upon confirmation that the cheque amount plus interim interest was paid.

What did the court decide?

Civil revision petition allowed; judgment and order confirmed in appeal set aside; petitioner acquitted and directed to be released forthwith; compoounding order made.

Shiney Vs v.Saravana Kumar — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.R.C.No.1681 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 01.10.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

Crl.R.C.No.1681 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.Nos.13866 & 13878 of 2024

Shiney

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.V.Saravanakumar

2.State rep. By The Public Prosecutor of Nilgiris, at Udhagamandalam. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Sections 438 r/w. 442 of BNSS to call for the records of the judgment and order dated 02.04.2024 made in Crl.A.No.25 of 2023 passed by the Court of Sessions Division of the Nilgiris District at Udhagamandalam confirming the judgment of conviction, sentence and compensation dated 28.01.2023 made in S.T.C.No.96 of 2021 by the Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court, Coonoor and to set aside the same by allowing this revision petition and consequently acquit the petitioner/accused.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Rajkumar For R1 : Mr.W.M.Abdul Azeez

¶14

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

¶15

1/6

¶16

Crl.R.C.No.1681 of 2024

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner was convicted by the learned Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court, Coonoor/Trial Court by judgment, dated 28.01.2023 in S.T.C.No.96 of 2021 for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo six months Simple Imprisonment and to pay the cheque amount of Rs.1,20,000/- within three months from the date of judgment, in default, to undergo two months simple imprisonment. Aggrieved over the judgment of the trial Court, an appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the Court of Sessions Division of the Nilgiris District at Udhagamandalam/lower appellate Court in C.A.No.25 of 2023. The learned Sessions Judge by judgment dated 02.04.2024 dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment of the trial Court, against which the present revision.

¶19

2.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner received financial help from the respondent for the family debts and urgent needs, the respondent taking advantage of the petitioner being a lady and her innocence, filled up a cheque as though the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- and using the same, a case has been registered. The

¶20

2/6

¶21

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

¶22

Crl.R.C.No.1681 of 2024

¶23

petitioner defended the case before the Trial Court as well as the Lower Appellate Court and put forth her case. Both the Courts below failed to consider the petitioner's contention and finally, the petitioner approached this Court suffering two concurrent findings against her. On 27.07.2024, the petitioner was arrested and confined to Central Prison, Coimbatore. After the petitioner was arrested, her family members with great difficulty mobilized funds and paid a sum of Rs.1,40,000/- to the the respondent as full and final settlement [Rs.49,000/- by way of Demand Draft No.292876 dated 30.09.2024 drawn in Indian Bank, Madras High Court Branch and Rs.91,000/- deposited into the account of the respondent on 30.09.2024].

¶24

3.The learned counsel for the respondent confirms the receipt of the

¶25

amount of Rs.1,40,000/-.

¶26

4.The petitioner has filed compounding petition along with affidavit

¶27

before this Court in Crl.M.P.No.13878 of 2024 in Crl.R.C.No.1681 of 2024 invoking Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to compound the offence and the same is ordered.

¶28

3/6

¶29

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

¶30

Crl.R.C.No.1681 of 2024

¶31

In the result, the case between the petitioner and the respondent is compounded. Hence, the judgment, dated 28.01.2023 in S.T.C.No.96 of 2021, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court, Coonoor and the judgment dated 02.04.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Court of Sessions Division of the Nilgiris District at Udhagamandalam in C.A.No.25 of 2023 are set aside. The petitioner is acquitted of all the charges levelled against her. The petitioner is directed to be released forthwith.

¶32

6.In the result, the criminal revision petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶33

01.10.2024

¶34

Index:Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation: Yes/No cse Note: Issue order copy on 01.10.2024

¶35

4/6

¶36

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

¶37

Crl.R.C.No.1681 of 2024

¶38

¶39

1.The Judicial Magistrate/ Fast Track Court, Coonoor.

¶40

2.The Sessions Judge, Court of Sessions Division of the Nilgiris District at

¶41

Udhagamandalam.

¶42

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.

¶43

5/6

¶44

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

¶45

Crl.R.C.No.1681 of 2024

¶46

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

¶47

cse

¶48

Crl.R.C.No.1681 of 2024

¶49

01.10.2024

¶50

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

¶51

6/6

Shiney v. v.Saravana Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiney v. v.Saravana Kumar

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

Ramesh Vs State by

Karal Markes Vs State Rep by

Kandhan Vs the State of Puducherry

Thangarasu @ Thangaraj Vs the State Rep.by

Praveen Raj Vs the State Rep by

M/S. Sree Gokulam Chit and Finance Co. (P) Limited Vs Mahalakshmi