Disposed¶5

R.Backiam v. M.Ganesh

Madras HC11 Nov 2025CRL A/140/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras HC CRL A No.140 of 2023 T.V.Thamilselvi 11-11-2025; S.T.C.No.77 of 2019 Judicial Magistrate Court Udhagamandalam Nilgiris; Sec.138 Negotiable Instruments Act complaint filed under Sec.190/200 Cr.P.C. dismissed for complainant non-appearance; judgment of acquittal dated 26.08.2022 set aside; complaint restored; fresh notice to respondent; dispose within four months; appellant to cooperate; R.Backiam W/o R.Ravikumar vs M.Ganesh S/o Muthulingam.

What did the court decide?

Findings in S.T.C.No. 77 of 2019 set aside and complaint restored; trial court to issue fresh notice to the respondent and dispose within four months; appellant to cooperate with the proceedings. ¶5

R.Backiam Vs M.Ganesh — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Findings in S.T.C.No. 77 of 2019 set aside and complaint restored; trial court to issue fresh notice to the respondent and dispose within four months; appellant to cooperate with the proceedings.

¶5

Issue for consideration

Whether the trial court's findings in S.T.C.No. 77 of 2019 - dismissing the appellant's Sec.138 NI Act complaint for her non-appearance - should be set aside and the complaint restored to give her another opportunity.

¶3

Court's answer

Court accepted that the appellant could not follow the proceedings or appear on the hearing date owing to lack of communication and her old age.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

The trial court erroneously dismissed the complaint; the dismissal is liable to be set aside.

¶5

Key takeaways

To give the appellant one more opportunity, the Court set aside the findings rendered in S.T.C.No. 77 of 2019 and restored the complaint.ratio¶5
Trial court directed to issue fresh notice to the respondent and dispose of the matter within four months from receipt of a copy of this order.ratio¶5
The appellant (addressed in the order as petitioner) is directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the trial court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRL A No. 140 of 2023 (High Court of Judicature at Madras, T.V.Thamilselvi J.), disposed of on 11-11-2025: Criminal appeal by the complainant R.Backiam W/o. R.Ravikumar against the decision of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Udhagamandalam (The Nilgiris District) in S.T.C.No. 77 of 2019 - described in the prayer as a judgment of acquittal dated 26.08.2022, and described in the order body as a dismissal of her complaint (filed under Sec.190 and 200 Cr.P.C. for a Sec.138 Negotiable Instruments Act offence) for her non-appearance. On counsel's plea of lack of communication and the appellant's age (about 50 years), the Court found the dismissal erroneous, set aside the findings, restored the complaint to give one more opportunity, directed the trial court to serve fresh notice on respondent M.Ganesh S/o.Muthulingam and conclude within four months, and required the appellant to cooperate. No precedent engaged.

¶1

CRL A No. 140 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11-11-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶6

CRL A No. 140 of 2023

k i

m W /

. R

v i k u

a r

A p p e

1/7

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

¶25

CRL A No. 140 of 2023

l l

n t (

s )

. G a n e s h S / o . M u t h u l i n g a m R e s p o n

¶33

2/7

¶34

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

¶35

CRL A No. 140 of 2023

¶36

PRAYER

¶37

To set aside the judgment of acquittal dated 26.08.2022 made in S.T.C.No. 77 of 2019 on the file of Learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Udhagamandalam, The Nilgiris Dt.

¶38

ORDER

¶39

Challenging the impugned order passed by the Judicial Magistrate Court, Udhagamandalam, The Nilgiris District in S.T.C.No.77 of 2019, the Appellant preferred this Criminal Appeal.

¶40

Before the trial court, the appellant filed a complaint under Sec.190 AND 200 of Cr.P.C. for an offence punishable under Sec.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in S.T.C.No.77 of 2019. But, due to her non-appearance, the

¶41

3/7

¶42

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

¶43

CRL A No. 140 of 2023

¶44

trial court dismissed the complaint. Challenging the said findings, now the appellant preferred this Criminal Appeal.

¶45

The learned counsel for appellant argues that due to lack of communication, she is not able to appear on the date of hearing and since she is aged about 50 years, she is not able to follow the proceedings. However, she is having valid defence to prove her case, but the opportunity was not given by the trial court. Hence, he prayed to set aside the findings rendered by the trial court.

¶46

Heard and considered submissions made by learned counsel for appellant and perused materials available on record.

¶47

Considering his submissions, the fact reveals that due to lack of communication as well as due to her old age, she is not able to follow the proceedings and not able to appear on the date of hearing, but the trial court erroneously dismissed the complaint as such is liable to be set aside. Therefore, to give one more opportunity, this Court is inclined to set aside the findings rendered in S.T.C.No. 77 of 2019 on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court, Udhagamandalam, The Nilgiris District and to restore the complaint. The trial court is also directed to issue fresh notice to the respondent and dispose the same within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is disposed of. However, the petitioner is directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the trial court.

¶48

¶49

4/7

¶50

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

¶51

CRL A No. 140 of 2023

¶52

1 - 1 1 - 2 0 2 5 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No rpp To Judicial Magistrate Court, Udhagamandalam, The Nilgiris Dt.

¶53

5/7

¶54

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

¶55

CRL A No. 140 of 2023

¶56

T . V . T H A M I L S E L V I J .

¶57

r p p

¶58

C R L A