SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 1864

G. JAYACHANDRAN
B. Rajhini – Appellant
Versus
R. Kumar – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:M. Prabhakar, Advocate. For the Respondent:SN. Thangaraj, for R. Sreerangan, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Revision case has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Tract Court, Magisterial level, Ambattur in S.T.C.No.92 of 2016 dated 22.08.2017 convicting the accused and sentenced to undergo four simple imprisonment and to pay a compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- to the complainant within one month and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for offence under Section 138 of NI Act and confirmed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge at Tiruvallur in C.A.No.134 of 2017 dated 06.11.2019.)

1.The revision petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (herein after called as “the NI Act”). This Criminal Revision is filed by the accused who was found guilty by the trial Court and same confirmed by the lower appellate Court.

2. The brief fact of the case is that the complainant R.Kumar and the accused Rajhini are related to each other. The husband of the accused and the complainant were involved in real estate business and they had money transaction between them. In the course of the said transactio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top