Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J
A. Vidhyadevi – Appellant
Versus
N.Suresh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of conviction and appeal conditions. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's counsel seeks time extension. (Para 2) |
| 3. court modifies condition extending deposit time. (Para 3) |
ORDER
The petitioner / accused in the case filed under Section138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, filed by the respondent, was convicted by the trial Court in STC No.339/2022 on 09.12.2024. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred appeal in Crl.A.No.14/2025 before the Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Erode and also filed a petition M.P.No.1 of 2025 to suspend the sentence. The first appellate Court, by order dated 28.01.2025 admitted the appeal and suspended the sentence on certain conditions. One of such conditions is that the petitioner has to pay 20% of the cheque amount, within a period of 60 days. Since the petitioner was unable to mobilise the said amount, she has filed the present petition to modify the said condition and to extend the time.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a lady and she may be given with sufficient time.
3. Considering the fact that the petitioner is a lady, this Court modifies condition No.(a)(i) of the o
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
