G.Chitra Devi v. Hh Ventures Private Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.07.2025 Coram:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Crl.O.P.No.19467 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.13387 of 2025 G.Chitra Devi ... Petitioner Vs.

M/s.HH Ventures Private Limited Rep. by its Manager/P.A.Holder S.Shanmuganathan S/o.A.Subramanian Having its registered office at No.284 Ramabiran Colony, Dharapuram Road Tirupur - 641 608 ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., to call for the records of the impugned docket order in S.T.C.No.1420 of 2024 dated 03.06.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (FTC), Tirupur and set aside the same.

For Petitioner : M/s.S.Modharshini 1/5

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner to set aside the impugned docket order in S.T.C.No.1420 of 2024 dated 03.06.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (FTC), Tirupur.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is facing trial in S.T.C.No.1420 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate (FTC), Tirupur. The petitioner had challenged the above case before this Court vide Crl.O.P.No.3599 of 2025 and when the matter came up for admission on 12.02.2025, this Court had dispensed with the personal appearance of the petitioner. Thereafter, when the matter was listed on 29.04.2025, the matter did not reach and it was orally stated that the matter would be listed on the first week of June 2025. The respondent/complainant had not filed any petition to vacate the interim order. The petitioner filed a memo before the trial Court stating the above facts whereas, the learned trial Judge, issued bailable warrant 2/5

against the petitioner, vide docket order dated 03.06.2025. Hence, the present petition is filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

4. Since no adverse order is being passed against the respondent, notice to the respondent is dispensed with.

5. It is seen that this Court had dispensed with the personal appearance of the petitioner and it was only for a specific period and subsequently, the same was not extended. Thereafter, the petitioner instead of appearing before the Magistrate, he has represented the said order passed by this Court. Therefore, the learned Magistrate has issued bailable warrant against the petitioner. Since the personal appearance of the petitioner was dispensed with only for a limited period, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought for.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed at the 3/5

admission stage itself. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

7. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Magistrate and file appropriate petition.

15.07.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No ksa-2 To The Judicial Magistrate (FTC), Tirupur 4/5

P.VELMURUGAN,J.

Ksa-2 15.07.2025 5/5