CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 09 MAD CK 0419

Arumugam vs Bridgestone India Private Limited

Madras High Court · Decided on 13 September 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
T. Sudanthiram, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal R.C. No. 1621 of 2005 and Criminal M.P. No. 9744 of 2005

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

5 paragraphs · 166 words

T. Sudanthiram, J.—Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, as well as the Respondent.

2.

The revision Petitioner is the accused, in C.C. No. 29633 of 2004, on the file of the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. The Respondent herein had filed a private complaint against the Petitioner for an offence u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Petitioner had filed a petition, in Crl. M.P. No. 1142 of 2005, before the trial Court seeking discharge. As the said petition was dismissed, the present revision has been filed before this Court.

3.

The learned Counsel for the Respondent had submitted that pending this revision petition, the Petitioner had filed an another application before the same Court, seeking for discharge and that petition had already been dismissed.

4.

This Court had perused the records.

5.

The petition filed before the trial Court, seeking discharge in a summons case procedure, is not maintainable. Therefore, the revision petition is also not maintainable. Hence, it is dismissed.