Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J
B.Chittibabu – Appellant
Versus
S.Balasundaram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details regarding the alleged offense under the negotiable instruments act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appellant's inability to pay the imposed deposit condition. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's consideration of arguments regarding the merits of the appeal. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. modification of deposit requirement from 20% to 10%. (Para 6) |
| 5. final disposition of the matter. (Para 7) |
O R D E R
The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to set aside condition 6 (b) imposed in the order passed by the learned XXI Additional Sessions Judge, Allikulam, Chennai, dated 28.01.2026, in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2026 in C.A.No.89 of 2026.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-
2.1. The complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed by the respondent/complainant against the petitioner/accused before the 25th Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, in C.C.No.1053 of 2021.
2.2. On 29.12.2025, the trial Court found the petitioner/accused guilty, convicted him and sentenced him to undergo eighteen months simple imprisonment and further directed him to pay the cheque amount of Rs.45,00,000/- as compensation, in default to undergo four months simple imprisonment.
2.3. Agai
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
