P. Boopathi v. Kanagaraj

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:18.07.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR CRL.O.P.(MD)Nos.8963 to 8966 of 2017 and CRL.M.P(MD)Nos.6072 to 6079 of 2017 P.Boopathi ... Petitioner in all Crl.O.Ps.

Vs.

Kanagaraj ... Respondent in Crl.O.P.No.8963/2017 M/s. Annex Investments and Akil Investments, represented by its Partner, P.Suresh.

... Respondent in Crl.O.P.No.8964/2017 M/s. Akil Investments, represented by its Partner, P.Suresh.

... Respondent in Crl.O.P.No.8965/2017 V.Senthil Kumar ... Respondent in Crl.O.P.No.8966/2017 PRAYER: Criminal Original petitions are filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records in connection with C.C.Nos.135/2017, 345/2016, 346/2016 and 328 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Karur and quash the same as of no legal substance.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Singan.

C O M M O N O R D E R These criminal original petitions have been filed to quash the charge sheet in C.C.Nos.135/2017, 345/2016, 346/2016 and 328 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Karur.

2. The petitioner in all these Criminal Original Petitions is the accused in the criminal case.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the cheque involved in the criminal proceedings was handed over to the respondents only as a security in respect of business dealings as between the petitioner and the respondents. The petitioner also states that he has filed a suit in O.S.No.38 of 2017 on the file of the Vacation https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Civil Court, Trichirapalli against the respondents and 4 others for return of the cheque.

4. The further case of the petitioner is that the cheques were handed over to the respondents for no consideration and that the criminal case has been foisted against the petitioner, though the cheques were meant for being kept by the respondents purely as a security for the business dealings. In the entire petition, the petitioner has not stated the exact nature of business dealing, so that, we can justify handing over of the cheque as a security. Since the petitioner has already filed a Civil Suit on similar allegations, it is open to the petitioner to pursue the same. However, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be stalled merely on the basis that the suit filed by him is pending.

5. The reading of the petition shows that the petitioner has filed a civil suit only after registration of the criminal case and that the bare perusal of the plaint does not disclose any logical reason for handing over the cheques to the respondents. The charge sheet has already been filed against the petitioner and the matter is now pending in C.C.Nos.135/2017, 345/2016, 346/2016 and 328 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Karur. The petitioner, who denies the charges has to establish his innocence only by adducing evidence. As on date, this Court does not find a prima facie case in favour of the petitioner, to doubt the genuineness of the complaint given against the petitioner.

6. In such circumstances, absolutely there is no scope for quashing the criminal case by accepting the statement of facts given by the petitioner in the petition. Hence, these Criminal Original Petitions are dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Karur.

+4cc to M/S.V.SINGAN, Advocate, SR.Nos.66362 to 66365. CRL.O.P.(MD)Nos.8963 to 8966 of 2017 18.07.2017 psd/akv SDS/SKN:RSK/SAR 2/28.07.2017/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/