High Court · 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated : 10.11.2025Coram:The Honourable Mrs.Justice T.V.THAMILSELVICrl.R.C.No.1601 of 2025R.Devendran ...PetitionerVersusM.Subramani ...Respondent This Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 438 r/w. 442 of BNSS, 2023 praying to set aside the judgment passed in Crl.A.No.672 of 2023 dated 03.07.2025 on the file of Court of VI Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai – 104 confirming the conviction and sentence ordered in C.C.No.3099 of 2019 dated 05.10.2023 on the file of Court of IIIrd Fast Track Court, Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai – 15 and acquit the Appellant/Accused from the charges under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act by allowing the revision.For Petitioner :M/s.D.N.DhurgashaFor Respondent :Mr.J.Satheesh1/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ORDERThis Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner/accused seeking to set aside the Judgment dated 03.07.2025 in Crl.A.No.672 of 2023 passed by the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, confirming the Judgment of conviction and sentence dated 05.10.2023 in C.C.No.3099 of 2019 passed by the learned IIIrd Fast Track Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai and acquit him from the charges under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.2. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner/accused obtained a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as loan from respondent/complainant and petitioner/accused had executed a Promissory Note dated 24.11.2017 promising to repay the said loan with interest. Thereafter, on 20.12.2017, petitioner/accused had obtained a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from respondent/complainant by promising to repay the same with interest. However, after receiving the said loan amounts, when the respondent/complainant demanded the petitioner/accused to repay the loan amount, petitioner/accused did not respond. After several attempts made by respondent/complainant, petitioner/accused had issued a Cheque bearing 2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis No.963505 dated 30.09.2018 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to respondent/complainant. When the respondent/complainant presented the said cheque for encashment, the same was returned unpaid for the reason, “Insufficient Funds” on 19.12.2018, pursuant to which, respondent/complainant had issued a Legal Notice dated 11.01.2019 to petitioner/accused calling upon the petitioner/accused to pay the cheque amount, but, even after the receipt of said legal notice, petitioner/accused did not come forward to repay the cheque amount. Therefore, respondent/complainant had preferred a complaint against the petitioner/accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The IIIrd Fast Track Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai had taken the said complaint on file in C.C.No.3099 of 2019.3. Before the Trial Court, on the side of complainant, respondent/complainant examined himself as P.W.1 and 5 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P5. On the side of accused, petitioner/accused examined himself as D.W.1 and one Mr.Mahendran was examined as D.W.2, but, no documents were marked.3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, Trial Court had held that petitioner/accused is found guilty for commission of offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. Therefore, the Trial Court vide Judgment dated 05.10.2023 in C.C.No.3099 of 2019, convicted the petitioner/accused and sentenced him to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment and to pay a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- as compensation to respondent/complainant, in default, to undergo 1 month simple imprisonment. 5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of Trial Court, petitioner/accused had preferred Criminal Appeal No.672 of 2023 before the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. However, Appellate Court vide Judgment dated 03.07.2025, dismissed the said Criminal Appeal and confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court. Hence, petitioner/accused has filed this Criminal Revision Case for the relief stated supra.6. The learned counsel on either side submitted in unison that the parties have entered into a Joint Compromise Memo and on the basis of which, the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled out of 4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Court. The learned counsels have also produced the said Joint Compromise Memo before this Court. Further, the learned counsels have prayed that the said Joint Compromise Memo may be recorded and this Criminal Revision Case may be allowed in terms of the said Joint Compromise Memo. 7. The Joint Compromise Memo entered into between the parties reads as follows:“JOINT COMPROMISE MEMO FILED BY BOTH PARTIES1.The Petitioner/Accused and the Respondent/Complainant respectfully submit that the above Criminal Revision arises from the conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.3099/2019 by the III Fast Track Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.2.The trial Court convicted the accused and directed the accused to pay a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Fifty Thousand only).3.During pendency of the appeal (Crl.A.No.672/2023) and later, before this Honourable Court, the accused deposited:◦Rs.90,000/- before the Trial Court as per order of the Appellate Court, and◦Rs.1,00,000/- before the Trial Court as per order of the High Court. Thus, a total sum of Rs.1,90,000/- stands deposited before the III FTC, 5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Saidapet Court.4.Pending this Criminal Revision, the parties have amicably settled the entire dispute out of Court.5.As per the final settlement, the accused has paid the balance amount of Rs.2,60,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Sixty Thousand only) to the complainant by way of Demand Draft having the following particulars:◦Demand Draft No.012874 and Ref.No.001363509272◦Dated: 05.11.2025◦Drawn on: HDFC Bank, Ashok Nagar Branch, Chennai – 600 083.◦In favour of: M.SubramaniThe respondent/complainant hereby acknowledges receipt of the above Demand Draft.6.By receiving this DD amount, the complainant confirms that Rs.4,50,000/- (full cheque amount) stands fully settled, including the deposits made before the District Court and High Court.7.The Respondent/Complainant states that:◦He has no further claim, monetary or otherwise, against the accused,◦the settlement is full and final and◦the compromise is entered into voluntarily without any coercion or pressure.In view of the above settlement, both parties jointly pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:a) Permit the parties to compound the offence under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881,6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis b) Set aside the conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.3099 of 2019 (and confirmed in Crl.A.No.672/2023),c) Direct the Trial Court (III FTC, Saidapet) to permit withdrawal/payment-out of the amount already deposited (Rs.1,90,000/-) by the accused, in favour of the FTC III Metropolitan Magistrate Saidapet Court C.C.No.3099 of 2019,d) Close this Criminal Revision Petition.” 8. The Joint Compromise Memo entered into between the parties is recorded and the same shall form part of the order. 9. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed in terms of the Joint Compromise Memo entered into between the parties and Judgment dated 03.07.2025 in Crl.A.No.672 of 2023 passed by the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, confirming the Judgment of conviction and sentence dated 05.10.2023 in C.C.No.3099 of 2019 passed by the learned IIIrd Fast Track Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai is hereby set aside. Consequently, petitioner/accused is acquitted of all charges. Fine amount, if any, paid shall be refunded to petitioner/accused. Bail bond(s), if any, executed by petitioner/accused shall stand cancelled.7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

10. Considering the request made by the parties in Joint Compromise Memo regarding the withdrawal of Rs.1,90,000/- which was deposited by the petitioner/accused to the credit of C.C.No.3099 of 2019 on the file of Trial Court, this Court directs the learned IIIrd Fast Track Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai to refund the petitioner/accused a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- deposited by him. On receipt of such amount, the petitioner/accused shall draw a Demand Draft for a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Thousand only) in the name of the respondent/complainant and to handover the same to respondent/complainant.10.11.2025mrr Index: Yes/NoSpeaking Order (or) Non-Speaking Order8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis To1.The VI Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.2.IIIrd Fast Track Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.mrrCrl.R.C.No.1601 of 202510.11.202510/10