High Court · 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated : 07.11.2025Coram:The Honourable Mrs.Justice T.V.THAMILSELVICrl.R.C.No.2292 of 2025K.Amutha ...PetitionerVersusM.Chinnasamy ...RespondentPrayer: This Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 438 r/w. 442 of BNSS, 2023 praying to call for the records and to set aside the order in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2024 in Crl.A.SR.No.2299 of 2024 dated 13.02.2025 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur.For Petitioner :Mr.P.Asai ThambiORDERThis Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused seeking to set aside the Order dated 13.02.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2024 in Crl.A.SR.No.2299 of 2024 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur.1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 03.03.2019, Petitioner/Accused obtained a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as loan from the Respondent/Complainant. When the Respondent/Complainant demanded the Petitioner/Accused to repay the loan amount, Petitioner/Accused had issued a Cheque bearing No.112890 dated 21.09.2022 for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to Respondent/Complainant. When the Respondent/Complainant presented the said cheque for encashment, the same was returned unpaid for the reason, “Insufficient Funds” on 27.09.2022, pursuant to which, Respondent/Complainant had issued a Legal Notice dated 07.10.2022 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 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Avinashi. The said complaint was taken on file in S.T.C.No.1952 of 2022.3. Before the Trial Court, on the side of Complainant, Respondent/Complainant examined himself as P.W.1 and 5 documents were 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis marked as Exs.P1 to P5. On the side of Accused, no one was examined as witness and no document was marked as exhibit.4. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court had held that Petitioner/Accused is found guilty for commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Therefore, the Trial Court vide Judgment dated 01.07.2024 in S.T.C.No.1952 of 2022, convicted the Petitioner/Accused and sentenced her to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment and to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation to Respondent/Complainant, in default, to undergo 1 month simple imprisonment. That apart, the Trial Court had observed that if the Petitioner/Accused fails to pay the compensation to Respondent/Complainant even after the completion of sentence period, it is open to the Respondent/Complainant to file an Application to initiate recovery proceedings against the Petitioner/Accused.5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of Trial Court, Petitioner/Accused had preferred Criminal Appeal in Crl.A.SR.No.2299 of 2024 along with condone delay petition in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2024 before the 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Principal District and Sessions Court, Tiruppur. The 1st Appellate Court vide Docket Order dated 01.02.2025, allowed Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2024 in Crl.A.SR.No.2299 of 2024 on condition that Petitioner/Accused shall deposit Rs.1,000/- as cost to the District Mediation Centre, Tiruppur, on or before 12.02.2025 and adjourned the case to 13.02.2025. Thereafter, when the case was taken up on 13.02.2025, there was no representation on behalf of Petitioner/Accused to show the compliance of earlier conditional docket order. Hence, the 1st Appellate Court has dismissed the petition in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2024 in Crl.A.SR.No.2299 of 2024 vide Docket Order dated 13.02.2025. Aggrieved by the same, Petitioner/Accused has filed this Criminal Revision Case for the relief stated supra.6. The learned counsel for Petitioner/Accused submitted that Mr.Kumar (husband of Petitioner/Accused) and Respondent/Complainant have entered into a Compromise Agreement dated 11.09.2025, in and by which, the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled.6.1. It is submitted by the learned counsel for Petitioner/Accused that under the Compromise Agreement dated 11.09.2025, 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Respondent/Complainant agreed to receive a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as full and final settlement from Mr.Kumar (husband of Petitioner/Accused) and thus, Mr.Kumar (husband of Petitioner/Accused) has paid Rs.1,00,000/- to Respondent/Complainant in the presence of two witnesses viz., Mr.Saminathan and Mr.Ramadoss. Further, under the said Compromise Agreement, Respondent/Complainant has vouched that he would not file any case against the Petitioner/Accused in the future.6.2. The learned counsel for Petitioner/Accused has produced a copy of the Compromise Agreement dated 11.09.2025 signed by Mr.Kumar (husband of Petitioner/Accused) and Respondent/Complainant, before this Court and prayed that the said Compromise Agreement may be recorded and this Criminal Revision Case may be allowed. He also prayed that since the Petitioner/Accused has been under incarceration for more than 3 months, Petitioner/Accused may be ordered to be released from jail.7. Today, Mr.Kumar (husband of Petitioner/Accused) and the Respondent/Complainant appeared before this Court and stated that they have entered into a Compromise Agreement dated 11.09.2025. The 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Respondent/Complainant stated that he has received Rs.1,00,000/- as full and final settlement from the husband of Petitioner/Accused and hence, he would not file any case against the Petitioner/Accused.8. The Compromise Agreement dated 11.09.2025 entered into between the husband of Petitioner/Accused and Respondent/Complainant reads as follows:“ வழக்குஒப்பந்தப்பத்திரம்2025 ஆம்வருடம்செ(cid:18)ப்டம்பர்11 ஆம்தேததிதிருப்பூர்மா(cid:23)வட்டம், அவிநா(cid:23)சிவட்டம், தே(cid:18)யூர், பந்தம்ப(cid:23)ளை(cid:31)யம், குமா(cid:23)ர்நாகர், த(cid:23)னியல்மாகன்குமா(cid:23)ர்( வயது45) (1) திருப்பூர்மா(cid:23)வட்டம், தண்ணீர்பந்தல், வீரப்பசெ(cid:18)ட்டிய(cid:23)ர்வீதி, கதவுஎண்.6சி, முத்துச்(cid:18)(cid:23)மிமாகன்சின்னச்(cid:18)(cid:23)மி( வயது56) (2). தேமாற்படி1 ம்இலக்கமிட்டவரின்மாளைனவிய(cid:23)கியஅமுத(cid:23)என்பவர்மீதுஅவிநா(cid:23)சிகுற்றவியல்நாடுவர் நீதிமான்றத்தில்க(cid:23)தே(cid:18)(cid:23)ளைலவழக்குஎண்STC.No.1952/2022 என்றஎண்ணில்வழக்குநாளைடசெபற்றுகடந்த 01.07.2024 ஆம்தேததிமா(cid:23)ண்புமிகுநீதிமான்றத்தில்குற்றவ(cid:23)ளிஎன்றுஅறிவிக்கப்பட்டது. பின்னர்எனது வழக்கறிஞர்மூலமா(cid:23)கதிருப்பூர்மா(cid:23)வட்டமுதன்ளைமாநீதிமான்றத்தில்தேமால்முளைறயீடுத(cid:23)க்கல்செ(cid:18)ய்யப்பட்டு அதன்தேமால்முளைறயீடுஎண்CRLA.No.2299/2024, ΜΡ.Νo.1/2024 என்றஎண்ணில்வழக்குநாளைடசெபற்று, 1ம் இலக்கமிட்டவரின்மாளைனவிக்குஉடல்நிளைல(cid:18)ரியில்ல(cid:23)தக(cid:23)ரணத்தின(cid:23)லும், வழக்கறிஞருக்குசெதரியப்படுத்த இயலவில்ளைல. பின்னர்13.02.2024 வழக்க(cid:23)னதுதள்ளுபடிசெ(cid:18)ய்யப்பட்டது. அதன்பின்னர்2ம் இலக்கமிட்டவர்தேமால்முளைறயீடுதள்ளுபடிஆனக(cid:23)ரணத்தின(cid:23)ல்conviction order செபற்றுதற்தேப(cid:23)து1ம் இலக்கமிட்டவரின்மாளைனவிதேக(cid:23)யமுத்தூர்Central Womens Jail இருந்துவருவத(cid:23)ல்தேமாற்செக(cid:23)ண்டு1ம் இலக்கமிட்டவரின்மாளைனவிளையசெKயிலில்இருந்துசெவளிதேயசெக(cid:23)ண்டுவரஉயர்நீதிமான்றத்தில்வழக்கு த(cid:23)க்கல்செ(cid:18)ய்யதேவண்டும்என்பத(cid:23)ல்1 ம்இலக்கமிட்டவரும், 2 ம்இலக்கமிட்டவரும்(cid:18)மார(cid:18)மா(cid:23)கதேபசி முடிசெவடுத்துஇறுதிய(cid:23)க2 ம்இலக்கமிட்டவர்1,00,000/- செக(cid:23)டுத்த(cid:23)ல்தேப(cid:23)தும்என்றுகூறியத(cid:23)ல்1ம் இலக்கமிட்டவர்ரூ.1,00,000/- ( ஒருஇலட்(cid:18)ம்செத(cid:23)ளைகமாட்டும்) 2 ம்இலக்கமிட்டவருக்குகீழ்க்கண்ட (cid:18)(cid:23)ட்சிகளின்முன்னிளைலயில்செக(cid:23)டுத்து2 ம்இலக்கமிட்டவர்ஒருமானத(cid:23)கசெபற்றுக்செக(cid:23)ண்ட(cid:23)ர். தேமாலும் நீதிமான்றத்தில்1 ம்இலக்கமிட்டவர்அளைழக்கும்செப(cid:23)ழுது2 ம்இலக்கமிட்டவர்1,00,000/- செபற்றத(cid:23)க ஒப்புக்செக(cid:23)ள்வத(cid:23)கவும்இனிதேமாற்செக(cid:23)ண்டுஎந்தசெவ(cid:23)ருவழக்கும்பதிவுசெ(cid:18)ய்யமா(cid:23)ட்தேடன்என்றும் இருவரும்இந்தஒப்பந்தப்பத்திரத்தின்(cid:18)மார(cid:18)மா(cid:23)கமூலம்ளைகசெய(cid:23)ப்பமிட்டுபதிவுசெ(cid:18)ய்துசெக(cid:23)ண்தேட(cid:23)ம்.”6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

9. The Compromise Agreement entered into between the husband of Petitioner/Accused and Respondent/Complainant is recorded and the same shall form part of the order. 10. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for Petitioner/Accused, Order dated 13.02.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2024 in Crl.A.SR.No.2299 of 2024 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur is set aside and this Criminal Revision Case is allowed.11. Taking note of the fact that the Petitioner/Accused has been under incarceration for more than 3 months, Petitioner/Accused is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and she is ordered to be released from jail. Fine amount, if any, paid by the Petitioner/Accused shall be refunded to her. Bail bond(s), if any, executed by Petitioner/Accused shall stand cancelled.07.11.2025mrr Index: Yes/NoSpeaking Order (or) Non-Speaking Order7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis To1.The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur. 2.The Judicial Magistrate, Avinashi.3.The Superintendent, Central Women’s Jail, Coimbatore.4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.mrrCrl.R.C.No.2292 of 202507.11.20259/9