Balaji v. Senthil Kumar

Bail Slip The Accused/Appellant hereby Balaji S/o. Srinivas Naidu was directed to be released on bail as per order dated 20.12.2010 in M.P.No.2/2010 in Crl.R.C.No.1218/2010 on the file of this court.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 31.08.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN Crl.R.C.No.1218 of 2010 Balaji ..Petitioner/Accused

Versus

Senthil Kumar ..Respondent/Complainant Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to aside the judgment of the learned Additional District Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Namakkal in C.A.No.98 of 2009 dated 16.09.2010 confirming the judgment dated 27.10.2009 in S.T.C. No.186 of 2008 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Namakkal For Petitioner : Mr.R.Kathikeyan For Respondent : No Appearance

O R D E R

This Criminal Revision case is filed, seeking to aside the judgment dated 16.09.2010 of the learned Additional District Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Namakkal in C.A.No.98 of 2009 confirming the judgment dated 27.10.2009 made in S.T.C. No.186 of 2008 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Namakkal convicting the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentencing him to undergo one year simple imprisonment.

2.

The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the revision case, the petitioner and the respondent have entered into a settlement whereby the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) to the respondent by way of cash representing the cheque amount and also compensation awarded by the Courts below. The said settlement was also attested by the Notary Public and it is also filed along with a Memo before this Court.

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

3.

There was no representation for the respondent on the earlier two occasions. Therefore, the Criminal Revision was directed to be listed today i.e., 31.08.2018. Today also, when the revision is taken up for consideration, there is no representation for the respondent, though the name of the respondent printed in the cause list.

4.

Taking into consideration of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the memo filed enclosing the copy of the receipt of the payment made by the respondent, the criminal revision is liable to be closed. It is made clear that the conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below stands set aside in the light of the settlement entered into between the petitioner and the respondent. 5.

Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar klt To 1.The Additional District Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Namakkal.

2.The Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Namakkal.

3. -do- Thro' the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Namakkal.

4. The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court, Madras.

+ 1cc to Mr. R. Karthikeyan, Advocate Sr.60920 Crl.R.C.No.1218 of 2010 KK(CO) EU(27/09/2018) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/