1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 11.02.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.20410 of 2021

and

CRL MP(MD)No.11621 of 2021

T.K.Mohamed Musthaque

... Petitioner/

Respondent

Vs.

R.Velmurugan

...Respondent/

Petitioner

Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482

Cr.P.C. to issue a direction to withdraw the case in STC.No.441 of

2017 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rameshwaram and

to transfer the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai or

to any other competent Court for fair trial.

For Petitioner

: Mr.B.Saravanan

For R1 & R2

: Mr.M.Kannan

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying to

issue a direction to withdraw the case in STC.No.441 of 2017 pending

on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rameshwaram and to

transfer the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai or to

any other competent Court for fair trial.

2.The petitioner is an accused in the complaint lodged by the

respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 138 and 142 of

Negotiable Instruments Act 1881.

3.The petitioner filed the Criminal Original Petition for

transfer of the case from the file of the learned Judicial

Magistrate, Rameswaram to the file of the learned Magistrate,

Madurai or to any other competent Court, on the ground that the

learned Judicial Magistrate acted in a biased manner and failed to

give sufficient opportunity for the petitioner to cross examine

P.W.1. Further, the learned Counsel, who appearing on behalf of the

respondents/defacto complainant is a Bar President and as such, he

has influence with all other advocates and Judicial Officer and as

such, if the trial continues with the same Court, the petitioner may

not get fair trial from the Trial Court. Whenever, the respondents

asked for adjournment, it was considered by the learned Judicial

Magistrate and whenever the petitioner sought for an adjournment, it

was rejected.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2

4. On perusal of the records, it would reveal that the

petitioner is coming from Kerala. On 27.11.2020 itself the defacto

complainant was examined as P.W.1 and Exs.P1 to P7 were marked.

Thereafter, it was posted to cross examine t P.W.1 on 15.12.2020.

On 15.12.2020, the petitioner was absent and as such the non-

bailable warrant was issued as against the petitioner. The said

non-bailable warrant was recalled only after a period of several

months. The complaint had been taken cognizance in the year 2017

and P.W.1 was examined only on 27.11.2020. After examination of

P.W.1, the petitioner was absent and non-bailable warrant was issued

against the petitioner. After recalling the non-bailable warrant,

the petitioner also filed a petition under Section 205 of the

Criminal Procedure Code in Cr.M.P.No.1462 of 2021. By an order

dated 21.10.2021, the learned Magistrate allowed the petition on

condition that the petitioner shall appear before the evidence when

his appearance necessary and questioning and final judgment or

whenever the learned Magistrate directed to appear, he must appear

before the Trial Court. Immediately after allowing the said

petition, the present Criminal Original Petition has been filed on

16.12.2021 for transfer of the case.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also raised a ground

that when the petitioner proceeded to attend the trial, he was

threatned by the respondent and his Counsel, since the learned

Counsel, who appearing for the respondent is a Bar President.

Therefore, the petititoner lodged a complaint before the Trial Court

and the same was forwarded to the Inspector of Police, Rameshwaram

Town Police Station and the petitioner was issued CSR 51 of 2021.

Though the petitioner was issued CSR, thereafter, no FIR has been

registered as against the