Crl.R.C.(MD) No.608 of 2017

BAIL SLIP

Palanisamy, male aged about 49(2017) S/o.Sundararaj, was released on

Bail as per order dated 31/07/2017, in CRL MP(MD) No.6848 of 2017 in

CRL RC(MD) No.608 of 2017.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

ORDER RESERVED : 02.07.2021

ORDER PRONOUNCED : 03.09.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP

Crl.R.C.(MD) No.608 of 2017

Palanisamy

... Petitioner

vs.

1.R.Suresh Babu

2.The Public Prosecutor,

Dindigul,

Dindigul District.

... Respondents

PRAYER:- This Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397(1) r/w

401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records

pertaining to the judgment in C.A.No.36 of 2012 dated 12.07.2016 by

the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dindigul confirmed conviction

and sentence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and

sentenced to 3 months Simple Imprisonment and to pay compensation of

the cheque amount of Rs.75,000/- (Seventy Five Thousand Only) within

2 months from the date of pronouncement of judgment under Section

375(3) of Cr.P.C., by the learned Fast Track Court at Magisterial

Level, Palani in C.C.No.28 of 2011 dated 25.01.2012 and set aside

the same.

For Petitioner

: Mr.D.Selvaraj

For R1

: Mr.T.Lenin Kumar

For R2

: Mr.T.Senthilkumar

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Revision Case is filed as against the judgment

dated 12.07.2016 passed in C.A.No.36 of 2012 by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Dindigul.

2.The brief facts, which are relevant for consideration in this

Revision Case, are as follows:-

1/7

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

Crl.R.C.(MD) No.608 of 2017

3.The petitioner herein is the accused before the learned

Judge, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level, Palani. The 1^st

respondent herein had preferred a complaint as against the

petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act

before the learned Judge, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level,

Palani.

4.As per the complaint, the complainant/1^st respondent herein

and the accused were friends for the past ten years. The

accused/petitioner was running a business in the name of Vigneswara

Agencies. On 20.10.2002, the petitioner/accused borrowed a sum of

Rs.75,000/- from the complainant/1^st respondent for his business

expenses and for discharging sundry debts.

5.On 20.01.2003, towards repayment of the loan, the

petitioner/accused had issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.75,000/-

bearing Cheque No.659297 in favour of the complainant/1^st respondent

drawn on 'Canara Bank', Keeranur Branch. The complainant presented

the cheque for collection on 20.01.2003 through his Bank, the

Lakshmi Vilas Bank Limited, Palani Branch. On presentation of the

cheque, the same was returned on 29.01.2003 with an endorsement

'Funds Insufficient'. The complainant/1^st respondent had informed

regarding the return of cheque on the ground of 'In Sufficient

Funds' to the petitioner/accused, but the petitioner/accused had not

made any arrangement to repay the debt.

6.In view of the same, the complainant/1^st respondent had issued

a legal notice dated 01.02.2003 to the accused, directing him to pay

the said amount within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt

of the notice. However, the petitioner/accused had not given any

reply. Hence, the complaint was filed under Section 138 of

Negotiable Instrument Act, praying the Court to issue summons to the

accused, to conduct an enquiry and pass judgment.

7.The complaint was filed by the complainant/1^st respondent

before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palani and thereafter, sworn

statement was also recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate,

Palani. As per the provisions of Section 200 of Cr.P.C., the private

complaint was taken cognizance by the learned Judicial Magistrate,

Palani having satisfied that