R. Ananthan v. Arunachalam Chettiyar

1 CRL.R.C.(MD)No.148 of 2016 BAIL SLIP R.Ananthan(M/59),S/o.Ramakrishnan(SOle Accused) was released on Bail vide order of this court dated 14.03.2016, made in CRL.MP(MD). No.2224 of 2016 in CRL.RC(MD).No.148 of 2016 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.12.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl. R.C.(MD)No.148 of 2016 R.Ananthan ..Petitioner/Appellant/Sole Accused Vs.

Arunachalam Chettiyar(Died) Alagappan (Respondent is substituted vide order dated 07.12.2020) .. Respondent/Respondent/ Complainant Prayer : This Criminal Revision is filed under Sections 397

(1) r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C., calling for the records and set aside the conviction in C.A.No.43 of 2012 dated 07.01.2016 on the file of the Mahila Court, Sivagangai, by confirming the sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate cum Fast Track Court, Karaikudi in C.C.No.102 of 2012 dated 02.11.2012 and acquit the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.AK.Azagarsami For Respondent : Mr.S.Madhavan

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2. The revision petitioner Ananthan was prosecuted for the offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in C.C.No.102 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate cum Fast Track Court, Karaikudi.

3. Arunachalam Chettiyar is the original complainant. The case ended in conviction and sentence. During the pendency of the revision case, Arunachalam Chettiyar passed away. He is survived only by Thiru.Alagappan. Therefore, Alagappan, S/o. Arunachalam Chettiyar is substituted.

4. The parties have arrived at compromise. The cheque amount is for a sum of Rs.35,000/-. The parties have agreed that if the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.50,000/-, the issue can be given a quietus. The learned counsel on either side confirmed that they arrived at such an understanding between the parties. The petitioner states that he would take a Demand Draft for a sum of Rs.50,000/- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2 CRL.R.C.(MD)No.148 of 2016 and hand over the same to the respondent.

5. Since the complainant has agreed to the same, the revision petitioner is directed to take a Demand Draft for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. Since the offence has been compounded, the Judgment impugned in this criminal revision stands set aside. I make it clear that if the petitioner fails to adhere to the terms of compromise, the Judgment passed by the Court below will stand automatically restored. This criminal revision case is allowed in these terms. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (crl.side) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) pmu Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To

1. The Judge, Mahila court, Sivagangai.

2.The Judicial Magistrate cum Fast Track Court, Karaikudi.

3.Do-Thro, The Chief Judcial magistrate, Sivagangai 4.The Section Officer,(2Copies) Criminal Section,(Records) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Crl. R.C.(MD)No.148 of 2016 07.12.2020 SSS(CO) KB(30.12.2020) 2P 6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/