High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 10 MAD CK 0047

A. Natarajan vs R. Balasubramaniyam

Madras High Court · Decided on 10 October 2011 · Citation: (2012) 1 CTC 848

HON’BLE JUDGES
C.T. Selvam, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal R.C. No. 1462 of 2006

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 265 words

C.T. Selvam, J.—This Revision is preferred against two concurrent judgments of the Courts below convicting the Petitioner for offence u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Petitioner faced prosecution for such offence in C.C. No. 292 of 2004 and was convicted under judgment dated 5.6.2006. There against he moved an Appeal which came to be dismissed on 15.11.2006. Against such dismissal, the present Revision is filed. This Court considers it not necessary to discuss the facts of the case as on being informed that the Petition to condone delay moved whilst preferring the Complaint before the Trial Court came to be allowed without notice to the Petitioner/Accused, this Court has called for the records from the concerned Trial Court. The Trial Court has forwarded the Petition to condone delay moved before it in C.M.P. No. 1703 of 2004.

2.

We find that the correct position stands informed by learned Counsel for the Petitioner. No notice has been issued to the Petitioner/Accused, before the Trial Court entered upon a decision of condoning the delay in preference of the Complaint u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. As held by the Apex Court in P.K. Choudhury Vs. Commander, 48 BRTF (GREF), the Trial Court could not have condoned the delay in preference of Complaint without having issued notice to the Accused. For the aforesaid reason, this Revision succeeds and the judgment of the Courts below convicting the Accused u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act shall stand set aside. The fine amount if any paid shall be refunded to the Petitioner.

Criminal Revision Petition is allowed. No costs.