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

2022 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 16407

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23.08.2022 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR Crl.O.P. No.17221 of 2022 &

Crl.M.P.No.10434 of 2022

1.M/s. Yazh Industries Pvt Ltd rep by its Managing partner Mrs.Sumathi

2.Aarudhra Milk Int Pvt Ltd rep by its Managing partner Mrs.Sumathi

3.Mrs.Sumathi

4.Mr.Selvakumar ... Petitioners Vs.

Ramesh ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to withdraw and transfer the S.T.C No.24 of 2020 on the file of Judicial Magistrate (FTC) at Kallakurichi.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Bharath For Respondent : Mr.N.Manoharan

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to transfer the proceedings initiated U/s.

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court, Kallakurichi in STC No.24 of 2020.

2. The allegations made for transfer on perusal itself indicates that it is nothing but mischievous one. Paragraph 6 of the affidavit, it is averred as if the counsel is a friend of Judicial Magistrate. Therefore, the transfer is sought for. Such allegation has been made without even verifying the facts. The drafting of such scurrilous allegation by the counsel itself is misconduct. If such act is entertained, then no Trial Court Judge will act freely. Therefore, this Court expresses its displeasure and condemn the attitude of the counsel who drafted such affidavit. Though, such conduct invite disciplinary proceedings, however the Court is restrained itself from referring the matter to Bar Council.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that though P.W.1 was examined on 04.03.2022, despite sufficient time is granted for cross examination, the cross examination has not been done by the petitioners. Therefore, P.W.1 evidence was closed. Thereafter, P.W.2 was examined on

06.05.2022 and he has also not been cross examined. Hence his evidence also closed and complainant side arguments also over. These facts are not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Though, this petition is for transfer, the Court would have dismissed the same at the initial stage, considering the fact that cross examination has not been done, in order to give a fair opportunity, one more opportunity is given to cross examine P.Ws.1 and 2 on the date fixed by the Trial Court. Trial Court shall summon the P.Ws.1 and 2 and fix a specific date on that date cross examination of P.Ws.1 and 2 shall be completed on the same day or atleast on the next working day. If both the days the cross examination is not been done by the petitioners, the petitioners will lose the right of any further cross examination. Thereafter, the Trial Court shall dispose of the main matter within a period of two months.

4. With the above directions, the Criminal Original petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

23.08.2022 kpr N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

kpr To The Judicial Magistrate (FTC) at Kallakurichi.

Crl.O.P. No.17221 of 2022 &

Crl.M.P.No.10434 of 2022

23.08.2022

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 Back to top