2025:MHC:2951

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

CRL RC No. 1281 of 2024

G.P.Dhevikala

D/o.G.Padmanabhan,

No.3, Jagadhambal Street,

Periyar Nagar, Nesapakkam,

KK Nagar,

Chennai-78.

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs

G.Manikandan

S/o.M.Ganesan,

No.84,

East Vannier Street,

West KK Nagar,

Chennnai-78.

...Respondent/Complainant

PRAYER : The Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to set aside the Judgment passed in Crl.A.No.334/2023 dated 4.4.2024 on the file of XVII Addl. Sessions Judge, City Civil Court at Chennai confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the Hon’ble Metropolitan Magistrate FTC Magistrate Level-V Saidapet, Chennai-15 made in CC.No.7315/2014 dated

23.05.2023 and acquit the Petitioner/Appellant/Accused from the charges U/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

For Petitioner : M/s.D.N.Dhurgasha For Respondent : M/s. Saiguna

ORDER

The Criminal Revision Petition challenges the conviction of the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentence imposed on the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,93,700/-

(Rupees One Lakh Ninety Three Thousand and Seven Hundred Only) to the complainant, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

2. The gist of the allegation is that the petitioner/accused had issued a cheque for Rs.1,93,700/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Three Thousand and Seven Hundred Only), towards discharge of her liability; that the said cheque was presented for collection, which was returned for the reasons, “INSUFFICIENT FUNDS” and inspite of statutory notice, the petitioner did not make any payment.

3. Both the courts below, convicted the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act and sentenced her to six months imprisonment, besides directing her to pay compensation of Rs.1,93,700/-.

4. It is now reported that the parties have now entered into a compromise and filed a Joint Compromise Memo dated 27.11.2025. The scanned copy of the Joint Memo of Compromise dated 27.11.2025 duly signed by the petitioner and the respondent and the learned counsel for both parties, is as follows:

5. M/s.D.N.Dhurgasha, the learned counsel for the respondent/complainant, confirms the compromise and submitted that the respondent has agreed to receive Rs.1,93,700/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Three Thousand Seven Hundred Only) in full and final settlement of his claims and has also prayed that the Judgments of conviction and sentence may be set aside. The respondent has received a sum of Rs.96,850/- on 27.11.2025 by a Demand Draft and has agreed to withdraw the amount of Rs.96,850/- deposited to the credit of C.C.No.7315 of 2014.

6. In view of the compromise arrived at and since the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is compoundable, this Court is inclined to accept the Joint Compromise Memo dated 27.11.2025 and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner by the trial Court.

7. Accordingly, the Joint Compromise Memo dated 27.11.2025 is taken on file. The Criminal Revision Case is allowed in terms of the Joint Compromise Memo dated 27.11.2025. The conviction and sentence imposed upon the petitioner vide judgment dated 23.05.2023 made in C.C.No.7315 of 2014, by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court - V, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015 and confirmed by the Judgment dated 04.04.2024 made in Crl.A.No.334 of 2023 passed by the learned XVIII Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

8. The respondent/complainant is permitted to withdraw Rs.96,850/- [Rupees Ninety Six Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Only] deposited in the trial Court, with accrued interest, by filing appropriate application. Fine amount, if any, paid by the petitioner shall be refunded.

Bail bo