Madras High Court
CRL RC/359/2022 of RAVICHANDRAN Vs SADASIVAM NAIR on 23 September 2026
CRL RC No. 359 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
CRL RC No. 359 of 2022
CNR: {HCMA010290232022}
S.S.Ravichandran
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
R.Sadasivam Nair
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: The Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the Judgment of conviction passed in C.A.No.41 of 2019 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Kanchepuram at Chengalpet in C.C.No.169
of 2017 on 28.02.2019 by the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, (Magisterial Level), Alandur.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.T.Muthukrishnan
For Respondent(s):
No appearance
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The Revision challenges the Judgment passed in C.A.No. 41 of 2019 confirming the Judgment passed in CC.No.169 of 2017 convicting the petitioner for the offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and sentencing the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay the cheque amount as compensation to the respondent and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days.
CRL RC No. 359 of 2022
2. It is the case of the respondent that the petitioner had issued a cheque for Rs.25,750/- towards discharge of his liability; that when the cheque was presented for collection, it was dishonoured for the reason ‘Payment stopped by the drawer’; and that in spite of statutory notice, the petitioner did not make any payment.
3. The respondent had examined himself as PW1 and marked Exts.P1 to P5. The petitioner neither examined any witness nor marked any document.
4. The trial Court found that the respondent had established the foundational facts to draw the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act; that the petitioner did not rebut the statutory presumption; and found the petitioner guilty of the offence and sentenced him as stated above. The appellate Court confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court.
5. Though a learned counsel has entered appearance, there is no representation for the respondent.
6. This Court finds that the finding of guilt by the Courts below cannot be faulted as the respondent has established that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt/liability and it was returned for the reason ‘Payment stopped by the drawer’.
CRL RC No. 359 of 2022
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner however, would submit that the petitioner would pay the cheque amount with reasonable interest as compensation to the respondent.
8. Considering the submission and keeping in view the object of Section 138 of NI Act, which is to compensate the complainant and also the fact that the cheque was issued in the year 2017, this Court is of the view that interest of justice would be met if the sentence of imprisonment is set aside and the petitioner is directed to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- within a period of four (4) weeks and in default, to suffer three months Simple Imprisonment. The respondent shall be entitled to Rs.50,000/- as compensation out of the fine amount paid by the petitioner.
9. The Revision is dismissed with the above modification. 23-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No TSG
CRL RC No. 359 of 2022
SUNDER MOHAN, J. TSG To
1. The Principal Sessions Judge, Kanchepuram at Chengalpet.
2. The Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, (Magisterial Level), Alandur. CRL RC No. 359 of 2022 23-09-2026