Dismissed¶29

Sangeetha v. K R Thiyagarajan

Madras HC3 Jun 2026CRL OP/13799/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRL OP No. 13799 of 2026, Madras High Court, 03-06-2026, M. Nirmal Kumar J.; Section 482 CrPC petition to quash trial court order refusing exemption from personal appearance of accused for receiving judgment in CC.No.2189 of 2020; H1B dependent visa claim unproven; Section 313 CrPC examination through counsel already permitted; Bhaskar Industries Ltd. v. Bhiwani Denim referred; trial court discretion upheld; petition dismissed, connected Crl.MP closed.

What did the court decide?

Though the petitioner claims to be a dependent of an H1B visa holder, she produced neither an H1B visa nor any proof of dependent visa status to establish her claim. ¶24

Sangeetha Vs K R Thiyagarajan — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal original petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be allowed so as to set aside the trial Court's order dated 29.04.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.365 of 2026 dismissing the petitioner-accused's plea to dispense with her personal appearance for receiving the judgment in CC.No.2189 of 2020.

¶12

Court's answer

Though the petitioner claims to be a dependent of an H1B visa holder, she produced neither an H1B visa nor any proof of dependent visa status to establish her claim.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The trial Court had already dispensed with the petitioner's personal appearance and permitted her to be examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. through her counsel; the case is now posted for judgment.

¶24

Key takeaways

Insistence on the petitioner's presence at the stage of receiving judgment is a matter within the discretion of the trial Court, which it has rightly exercised.ratio¶24
There is no reason to interfere with the order dated 29.04.2026 passed in Crl.M.P.No.365 of 2026 by the trial Court.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (M. Nirmal Kumar, J.) dismissed a criminal original petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the 20th Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Allikulam, Egmore's order dated 29.04.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.365 of 2026 in CC.No.2189 of 2020, whereby the petitioner-accused's plea to dispense with her personal appearance for receiving the judgment was rejected. The petitioner, who claimed to be a dependent spouse of an H1B visa holder citing USA emigration conditions and air-fare escalation, produced no H1B visa or proof of dependent visa status. The trial Court had already dispensed with her personal appearance during trial and permitted examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. through counsel; the case stood posted for judgment. Holding that insistence on presence for receiving judgment lies within the trial Court's discretion, the High Court found no reason to interfere and dismissed the petition, closing the connected miscellaneous petition. The petitioner's reliance on the Apex Court decision in M/s.Bhaskar Industries Ltd. vs. M/s.Bhiwani Denim and Apparels Ltd. was noted but the precedent was not applied to overturn the trial Court's order.

¶1

CRL OP No. 13799 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03-06-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

CRL OP No. 13799 of 2026 and Crl.MP.No.8892 of 2026

¶7

Sangeetha D/o. Ponnurangam, No.64/3, Muniappa Street, Perambur, Chennai - 600 011.

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

K R Thiyagarajan S/o. S.K.Ramanathan, No.51/1, Madurai Street, Ayanavaram, Chennai - 600 023.

¶11

..Respondent(s)

¶12

PRAYER: This criminal original petition filed under Section 482 of CR.P.C. to set aside the order made in Crl.M.P.No.365 of 2026 in CC.No.2189 of 2020 dated 29.04.2026 on the file of the Hon’ble 20^th Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Allikulam, Egmore and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.S.Senthilnathan

ORDER

The petitioner/accused facing trial in CC.No.2189 of 2020 filed a petition

¶17

in Crl.MP.No.365 of 2026 seeking dispense with the personal appearance of the

¶18

petitioner and the petitioner may be exempted for receiving the judgment. The Trial Court by order dated 29.04.2026 dismissed the same, against which, the

¶19

present petition has been filed.

¶20

Page1 of 4

¶21

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

¶22

CRL OP No. 13799 of 2026

¶23

2.The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the spouse of H1B Visa holder and Emigration department of USA imposed unworkable conditions for those who crosses the frontiers of USA and seek extension of H1B Visa. Air ticket fares are also swelled due to war situation. Hence, prayed for dispensing with the personal appearance of accused for receiving the judgment. Further, in support of his contention relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of M/s.Bhaskar Industries Ltd., Vs. M/s.Bhiwani Denim and Apparels Ltd.,. The trial Court not considering the same, dismissed the petition.

¶24

3.Considering the submission and on perusal of the materials available on record, it is seen that though the petitioner claims to be a dependent of H1B visa holder, she has not produced any H1B visa to establish the same. Further, there is no proof has been filed to show that she is a dependent visa holder. The trial Court already dispensed with the personal appearance of the petitioner and also permitted the petitioner to be examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. through her counsel. The case is now posted for judgment. The trial Court not satisfied with the reasons stated in the petition and dismissed the same. Further, the trial court insisted on the presence of the petitioner. The matter is within the discretion of the trial Court and the trial Court has rightly held so.

¶25

__________ Page2 of 4

¶26

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

¶27

CRL OP No. 13799 of 2026

¶28

In view of the above, this Court finds that no reason to interfere with the order dated 29.04.2026 passed in Crl.M.P.No.365 of 2026 by the trial Court.

¶29

Accordingly, the criminal original petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶30

03-06-2026

¶31

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No sms

¶32

¶33