logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 7080 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras
Case No : CRL. RC. No. 2308 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
Parties : S. Gandhi Versus J. Devaraj
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: J. Franklin, Advocate. For the Respondent: S. Karunanithi, Advocate.
Date of Judgment : 30-09-2026
Head Note :-
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 438 & Section 442 -
Judgment :-

(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Sections 438 & 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to set aside the judgment of the Additional Sessions Court at Udhagamandalam in C.A. No. 43 of 0224 dated 07.03.2026 confirming the conviction sentence passed by the Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Gudalur in STC No. 4 of 2019 dated 07.02.2024 and allow this Criminal Revision Case.)

1. The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision case challenging the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udhagamandalam, in C.A.No.43 of 2024 dated 07.03.2026, partly confirming the judgment passed by the learned Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Gudalur, convicting the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

2. The trial Court sentenced the petitioner to undergo one year simple imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and also to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) as compensation to the respondent. The appellate Court confirmed the conviction, substantive sentence and compensation, but set aside the fine amount alone.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the impugned judgment, the petitioner is now confined in the Central Prison, Coimbatore.

4. Learned counsel appearing on either side submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise and have filed a joint compromise memo dated 29.09.2026 entered into between them.

5. The respondent appeared in person before this Court, was identified by his counsel and has also produced his Aadhar card.

6. As per the said joint compromise memo, the respondent has agreed to receive a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- (Rupees One Lakh and Eighty Thousand Only) in full and final settlement of all his claims against the petitioner. The respondent has received Rs.1,50,000/- from the petitioner and has agreed to withdraw a sum of Rs.30,000/- deposited by the petitioner to the credit of STC No. 4 of 2019.

7. The joint compromise memo dated 29.09.2026, signed by the petitioner and the respondent, is taken on record and shall be treated as part and parcel of this order. The scanned reproduction of the said joint compromise memo dated 29.09.2026 is as follows:







8. In view of the joint compromise memo and considering the nature of the offence, this Court permits the parties to compound the offence. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Udhagamandalam, in C.A.No.43 of 2024 dated 07.03.2026, partly confirming the judgment dated 07.02.2024 passed by the learned Principal District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Gudalur, in S.T.C.No.4 of 2019, is hereby set aside.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed in terms of the said joint compromise memo, and the petitioner is acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Thereby, the Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore, is directed to release the petitioner forthwith. The fine amount, if any, paid by the petitioner shall be refunded. The bail bond, if any, executed shall stand discharged.

10. The respondent is permitted to withdraw Rs.30,000/- deposited by the petitioner to the credit of STC No. 4 of 2019.
 
  CDJLawJournal