logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 5855 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras
Case No : CRL. RC. No. 1634 of 2026 & Crl. M.P. No. 1442 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR
Parties : K. Giridharan Versus Sundara Bharathi
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: A. Arasu Ganeshan, Advocate. For the Respondent: K. Balasubramaniam, Advocate.
Date of Judgment : 14-08-2026
Head Note :-
BNSS - Section 438 r/w Section 422 -
Judgment :-

(Prayer: Criminal Revision filed under Section 438 r/w 422 of BNSS to set-aside the impugned judgment passed by the XXI Additional City Civil Court Allikulam in Crl.A.No.1300 of 2025 dated 17.02.2026 and confirming the order STC.No.2169 of 2023 dated 17.10.2025 passed by the XXVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai impugned order in accordance with law to secure the ends of justice and thus render justice.)

1. Challenging the Judgment, dated 17.02.2026 passed in Crl.A.No.1300 of 2025 by the XXI Additional City Civil Court, Allikulam, the present Criminal Revision is filed by the petitioner/Accused.

2. The respondent/complainant filed a private complaint against the present revision petitioner in S.T.C.No.2169/2023 before the XXVII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

3. After analysing the evidence on record, the learned XXVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and thus convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay a sum of Rs.36,00,000/- towards compensation within a period of two months to the complainant and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

4. Aggrieved over the same, the revision petitioner/accused filed an appeal in Crl.A.No.1300 of 2025 before the XXI Additional City Civil Court, Allikulam. The XXI Additional City Civil Court, Allikulam vide Judgment dated 17.02.2026, dismissed the appeal, confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court, aggrieved over which, the present revision is filed.

5. This Court, on 11.08.2026, directed the petitioner to deposit the entire compensation amount of of Rs.36,00,000/- to the respondent / complainant as ordered by the trial court and to produce the deposit receipt on the next date of hearing, so as to consider the petition for suspension of sentence.

6. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, Mr.Arasu Ganeshan, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the entire compensation of Rs.36,00,000/- has been deposited to the credit of the respondent by the petitioner.

7. The respondent / complainant appeared in person and accepted the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

8. A Joint Compromise Memo dated 13.08.2026 has also been filed to that effect and the same is duly signed by the respondent/complainant and the counsel on either side. A copy of the same is scanned below for better understanding:







9. In the light of the above, this Court passes the following order:

i) The Joint Compromise Memo, dated 13.08.2026, is hereby recorded;

ii) the Criminal Revision Case is Allowed in terms of the Joint Compromise Memo, dated 13.08.2026;

iii) the Judgment dated 17.02.2026 in Crl.A.No.1300 of 2025 passed by the XXI Additional City Civil Court, Allikulam and the Judgment dated 17.10.2025 in STC.No.2169 of 2023 passed by the XXVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, are set aside.

(iv) The petitioner/accused is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(v) The Superintendent of Police, Central Prison Prison, Puzhal is directed to release the petitioner forthwith, if he has not involved in any other case.
 
  CDJLawJournal