V.Narayanasamy Vs K.Vaithisubramanian

Prayer: To SUSPEND THE SENTENCE passed by the Honble XXI Additional City Civil Court, Allikulam in Criminal Appeal No.1147 of 2025 dated 06.04.2025 confirming the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court-V, Saidapet, Chennai -15 in C.C.No.12308/2010 dated 18.08.2025 pending disposal of the above Criminal revision and thus render justice.

¶13

For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Jaikumar For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Sriram

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the Honble XXI

¶16

Additional City Civil Court, Allikulam in Criminal Appeal No.1147 of 2025 dated 06.04.2025 confirming the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed

¶17

Page1 of 8

¶18

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

¶19

CRL MP No. 9103 of 2026

¶20

by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court-V, Saidapet, Chennai -15 in C.C.No.12308/2010 dated 18.08.2025.

¶21

2.By the impugned judgement of conviction and sentence and order of the Trial Court, the Revision Petitioner was convicted for offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo six months simple imprisonment and to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation along with interest 6% per annum for the said cheque amount from the date of dishonor of case cheque to till date, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

¶22

3.Challenging the above said judgement of conviction and sentence and order, the Revision Petitioner has filed the above Criminal Revision, along with the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, seeking suspension of sentence and bail pending disposal of the Criminal Revision.

¶23

4.This Court heard Mr.M.Jaikumar appearing for the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner and Mr.S.Sriram, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent and considered their submissions and also perused materials placed before this Court.

¶24

5.The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has submitted that the

¶25

Page2 of 8

¶26

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

¶27

CRL MP No. 9103 of 2026

¶28

complainant failed to establish the foundational facts relating to the alleged loan of Rs.5,00,000/- including the date, mode of payment source of funds and capacity to lend such a substantial amount, which is mandatory when the transaction is disputed; both the court have mechanically drawn presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Act without examining whether the complainant discharged the initial burden of proving a legally enforceable debt, particularly when no documentary proof such as promissory note, receipt, bank statement or contemporaneous acknowledgment of loan was produced which itself creates a serious doubt about the existence of any subsisting legally enforeceable debt on the date of presentation. The defense has rightly established that the case of the complainant is absolutely false and the complainant failed to prove the guilt of the petitioner beyond the reasonable doubt. It was further argued that the judgment passed by both the Courts below was based on surmises and conjectures without considering the entire evidence on record.

¶29

6.It is further argued that due to pendency of the criminal cases before this High Court, there is a blinking chance that in the near future, this Criminal Revision Case will be finally heard and decided. It is further submitted that there are arguable points in this Criminal Revision Case and the Revision Petitioner has a fair chance of success in this Criminal Revision Case. Thus, the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner prayed for suspension of sentence

¶30

Page3 of 8

¶31

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

¶32

CRL MP No. 9103 of 2026

¶33

and bail, till the disposal of this Criminal Revision Petition.

¶34

7.Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the Revision Petitioner have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the Revision Petitioner that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the Court, whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions, which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The Revision Petitioner undertake that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in disposal of Revision.

¶35

8.The learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner and submits that the judgements passed by the Courts below are as per the law after considering the entire evidences and thus, the relief sought by the Revision Petitioner at this stage, be refused by this Court.

¶36

9.Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the Respondent, this Court is of the view that the Trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence on record

¶37

Page4 of 8

¶38

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

¶39

CRL MP No. 9103 of 2026

¶40

and the judgment was passed without considering the entire materials placed before it and during the Trial the Revision Petitioner was also on bail.

¶41

10.Further, it is observed that when the accused had been under incarceration for sometime and when there are points in the Revision, which favour the accused, then the Courts should not shy from granting suspension of sentence, as the liberty of the individual would be at stake, if the revision results in acquittal at a later point of time. In this regard, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Rabi Prakash Vs. The State of Odhisha reported in 2023 Live Law (SC) 533 is of relevance.

¶42

11.The Revision Petitioner has raised substantial grounds in the Revision, which require detailed appraisal. Further, the Revision is not likely to be taken up in the near future. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the Revision Petitioner is entitled to the relief of suspension of sentence and bail.

¶43

12.Accordingly, pending the Criminal Revision Case, the relief of suspension of sentence and bail is granted to Revision Petitioner, namely, V.Narayanasamy, S/o.Venkatesh, on the following conditions:-

¶44

‘’ (i) The Revision Petitioner shall surrender before the

¶45

Page5 of 8

¶46

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

¶47

CRL MP No. 9103 of 2026

¶48

learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court-V, Saidapet, Chennai-15 within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such surrender, the Revision Petitioner is ordered

¶49

to be released on bail, on her executing a personal bond, along with two sureties for a sum of Rs.15,000/ - (Rupees fifteen thousand only), subject to furnishing an undertaking that he will co-operate in the hearing of the present Revision.

¶50

(ii) The Revision Petitioner and sureties shall affix their Photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the bond and the above said Court may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

¶51

(iii) The Petitioner shall appear before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court-V, Saidapet, Chennai-15 once in every month, i.e., on 5^th day of every month commencing from the month of August 2026 at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶52

(iv) On acceptance of his bail bond and sureties, the Trial Court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on records of this Revision.

¶53

(v) The realization of the fine amount, if any, shall also remain suspended during the pendency of the present Revision.’’

¶54

Page6 of 8

¶55

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

¶56

CRL MP No. 9103 of 2026

¶57