Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J
M/s.Kaira Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
M/S.Om Murugan Enterprises – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. trial court conviction under ni act 138. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioners' non-appearance due to pending recall petition. (Para 2) |
| 3. bailable offence; appellate court erred on suspension. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. direct fresh suspension petition; no coercive action. (Para 6) |
ORDER
The petitioners/accused in a case filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed by the respondent in STC.No.4373 of 2025 was convicted by the trial Court by Judgment dated 02.02.2026 and sentenced to 1 year imprisonment and directed to pay the cheque amount of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner had preferred an appeal in CA.No.252 of 2026 before the Sessions Court and also filed a suspension of sentence petition in Cri.M.P.No.1 of 2026. The Sessions Judge by the order dated 24.02.2026 dismissed the suspension of sentence petition for the reason that the petitioner had not appeared before the trial Court on the date of Judgment and that no suspension of sentence order has been granted by the trial Court under Section 389 (3) of Cr.P.C. , against which, the present petition has been filed.
2.The contention of the petitioners is that the trial Court ha
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
