Dismissed

A.Aruna v. Manimangala Finanace Rep by its

Madras HC7 Mar 2024CRL RC/389/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner facing cheque dishonour trial sought to examine a notary public and police officer and mark an affidavit and FIR as defence evidence under Section 254(2) Cr.P.C.; the trial court dismissed her petition. The Madras High Court held she had already produced her documents under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and declined interference, dismissing the revision.

What the court decided

AI extract

A.Aruna Vs Manimangala Finanace Rep by its — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.R.C.No.389 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 07.03.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

Crl.R.C.No.389 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.3542 of 2024

¶7

A.Aruna ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Manimangala Finance Rep.by its Manager cum Partner, K.Sathyanarayanan, No.88B, Udayar Complex, Adjacent to Court Complex, Vinayagapuram, Athur Taluk, Salem District ... Respondent

¶10

PRAYER: Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records and set aside the order dated 01.02.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.179 of 2023 in STC.No.35 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Attur, Salem District.

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner to set aside the

¶13

order dated 01.02.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.179 of 2023 in STC.No.35 of 2021 on

¶14

the file of the Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Attur, Salem District.

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.1 of 4

¶16

Crl.R.C.No.389 of 2024

¶17

¶18

2. The petitioner is facing a trial in STC.No.35 of 2021 on a private

¶19

complaint filed by the respondent for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. He filed a petition under Section 254(2) of Cr.P.C., in Crl.M.P.No.179 of 2023 came to be dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 01.02.2024. Against which, the present Criminal Revision Case is filed.

¶20

3. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner had filed the

¶21

affidavit executed by one Chandran whom the petitioner had live in relationship and this affidavit would prove to probablise the defence of the petitioner and the petitioner has also produce the documents under examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and she had also needs to mark the FIR in Crime No.72 of 2020, in which, she is the defacto complainant. These two documents to probablise the defence of the petitioner, which needs to examine the Advocate and notary public who have attested the affidavit and the Inspector of Police, Kannankurichi Police Station, Salem. As regards the undertaking affidavit, the petitioner herself can handle these documents. This Court is of the view that examination of the notary public of the documents and the Inspector of Police, FIR is not required. Further, the petitioner has

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.2 of 4

¶23

Crl.R.C.No.389 of 2024

¶24

already produced her documents under Section 313 Cr.P.C., with the attendance circumstances. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to allow the revision case.

¶25

4. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. Consequently, the connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed.

¶26

07.03.2024

¶27

Speaking order/Non-speaking order Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No rpl To The Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Attur, Salem District.

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.3 of 4

¶29

Crl.R.C.No.389 of 2024

¶30

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

¶31

rpl

¶32

Crl.R.C.No.389 of 2024

¶33

07.03.2024

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.4 of 4

A.Aruna v. Manimangala Finanace Rep by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A.Aruna v. Manimangala Finanace Rep by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Kumar Vs J.Sudha

V.Singaravelu Vs State Rep.by

J.Sivanraj Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by

T.Chandrasekar Vs Inspector of Police

T.Prabhakaran Vs State of Tamilnadu

Vasanth Vs State through