C.Nallathambi v. P.Jayakumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Ninth day of January Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice V. PARTHIBAN CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.1355 of 2019 IN CRL RC.154/2019 C.NALLATHAMBI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs P.JAYAKUMAR [ RESPONDENT ] Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL RC.154/2019 on the file of the High Court, the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence imposed by the Learned III Metropolitan Magistrate,George Town, Chennai in C.C.No.733 of 2014 dated 07.03.2018 as confirmed by the Learned XVIII Additional Session Judge Chennai dated.11.12.2018 and made in CA No.165/2018 till the disposal CRL RC.154/2019 [IN CRL.MP.NO.
1355 OF 2019] Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL RC.154/2019 on the file of the High Court and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.V.BHIMAN, Advocate for the petitioner, the court made the following order:- The petitioner/appellant is convicted for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo six months simple imprisonment and he was also directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,51,000/- as compensation to the complainant, in default, sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months, by the learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai, under judgment, dated 07.03.2018, in C.C.No.733 of 2014.
The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court were confirmed by the learned XVIII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, under judgment in C.A.No.165 of 2018, dated 11.12.2018. Hence, the petitioner seeks suspension of sentence.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant would submit that there are several infirmities and inconsistencies found in the prosecution case. It is contended that there are contradictions in the material particulars between the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.
3.In view of the fact that there are several infirmities in the prosecution case and there are arguable points involved in the revision, as contended by learned counsel for petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner herein is entitled to the relief of grant of suspension of sentence. 4.Accordingly, the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended and the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on the following conditions:
(i)The petitioner/appellant shall deposit 50% of the cheque amount to the credit of C.C.No.733 of 2014, on the file of the learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; (ii)The petitioner/appellant/accused shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, GT, Madras.
(iii)The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m. pending disposal of the revision.
(iv)In case the conditions are not complied with, the interim order of suspension of sentence shall stand vacated automatically without further reference to this Court.
-sd/- 29/01/2019 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO 1 THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NO.III, GEORGE TOWN, CHENNAI.
2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE XVIII ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, CHENNAI.
+1C.C. to M/S.V.BHIMAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR NO.1951 Order in CRL MP.1355/2019 in CRL RC.154/2019 Date :29/01/2019 From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format MK:30/01/2019