Crl.R.C.Nos.295 & 297 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

RESERVED ON : 27.03.2023

PRONOUNCED ON: 20.04.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

Crl.R.C.Nos.295 & 297 of 2021

Uthirapathy

...

Petitioner in

both Crl.R.Cs.

/vs/

Periyasamy

...

Respondent in

both Crl.R.Cs.

PRAYER : Criminal Revision Cases have been filed under Sections 397

r/w 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure to set aside the order of convicting

the petitioner dated 03.03.2021 passed by the learned III Additional

District Sessions Judge, Cuddalore at Virudhachalam in C.A.Nos.14 & 15

of 2018 dated 03.03.2021 confirming the judgment passed dated

26.02.2018 by the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virudhachalam, Cuddalore

District in STC Nos.210 & 242 of 2015.

For Petitioner

... Mr.M.Senthilkumar

in both Crl.R.Cs.

For Respondent

... Mr.T.Gandhi

in both Crl.R.Cs.

Page 1 of 15

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

Crl.R.C.Nos.295 & 297 of 2021

COMMON ORDER

Challenging the orders of conviction dated 03.03.2021 passed in

C.A.Nos.14 & 15 of 2018 by the learned III Additional District Sessions

Judge, Cuddalore at Vriddhachalam, confirming the judgment dated

26.02.2018 passed in STC Nos.210 & 242 of 2015 by the Judicial

Magistrate No.I, Vriddhachalam, Cuddalore District, these present criminal

revision cases have been filed.

2.The fact of the case is that the revision petitioner is an accused and

the respondent is the complainant in STC Nos.210 & 242 of 2015 on the

file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Vriddhachalam. The accused and the

complainant are friends. The accused requested the complainant on

01.04.2023 to lend a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- to meet educational expenses of

his son and for business development. Since the complainant was not

having that much of amount, he requested his brother Ponnusamy to lend a

sum of Rs.7,00,000/- to the accused, so that, on 14.04.2013 Ponnusamy

gave a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- to the accused at the house of one Tamilselvi,

Page 2 of 15

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

Crl.R.C.Nos.295 & 297 of 2021

a daughter of the complainant. In respect of the same, the accused agreed

to repay the amount with 12% interest and executed a promissory note in

favour of Ponnusamy, again the accused demanded further a sum of

Rs.6,00,000/- from the complainant. The complainant gave a sum of

Rs.6,00,000/- to the accused on 16.05.2013, for that, the accused executed

a promissory note in favour of the complainant, again the accused

demanded a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to meet his son's educational Expenses.

The complainant through his daughter Tamilselvi advanced a sum of

Rs.2,00,000/- to the accused on 23.08.2013, for that, the accused executed

promissory note in favour of Tamilselvi. The accused had not repaid the

abovesaid borrowed sum with interest to the complainant. While that

being so, the accused lodged a complaint before the Deputy Superintendent

of Police, Virudhachalam on 01.08.2014 for granting six months time for

repaying the borrowed amount. Thereafter, they arrived at a compromise

and agreed to repay the amount of Rs.20,00,000/-. In pursuance of

settlement, the accused gave ICICI Bank two cheques dated 26.12.2014

& 05.01.2015 bearing Cheque Nos.929717 and 929719 for a sum of

Page 3 of 15

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

Crl.R.C.Nos.295 & 297 of 2021

Rs.10,00,000/- each. The complainant presented the cheques bearing

Nos.929717 and 929719 dated 26.12.2014 and 05.01.2015 through his

bank and the same were returned as “Account closed.” Hence, the

complainant filed complaints in S.T.C.No.210 of 2015 and S.T.C.No.242

of 2015 before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Vridhachalam, for the offence

under Section 138 N.I.Act for the dishonour of cheques bearing

Nos.929717 date