CRL A/459/2024 of P.KATHIRAVAN Vs K.SURESH on 17 September 2026

Judgment

This criminal appeal has been filed challenging the judgment of acquittal dated 09.11.2018 passed in C.C.No.135 of 2013 by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Namakkal.

( Uploaded on: 21/10/2026 02:37:26 pm )

CRL A No. 459 of 2024

2. The appellant, as the complainant, has filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent/accused in C.C.No.135 of 2013 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Namakkal. The trial Court, by its judgment dated 09.11.2018, dismissed the complaint and acquitted the respondent. Against by the acquittal, the appellant has preferred an appeal before the Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal in Criminal Appeal No.79 of 2018. By a judgment dated 11.12.2019, the lower appellate Court allowed the appeal and set aside the trial Court’s judgment of acquittal. Consequently, the respondent was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months and ordered to pay a fine of Rs.10,00,000/-, and in default of payment, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months.

3. Challenging the conviction and the sentence imposed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal, the respondent herein filed a criminal revision petition before this Court in Crl.R.C.No.162 of 2020. Pending criminal revision petition, citing the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of K.Rajalingam Vs. R.Suganthalakshmi, reported in 2020 SCC OnLine Mad 1052, the complainant had filed Crl.M.P.No.4256 of 2023 to transpose him as appellant by treating the criminal revision petition as criminal appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Namakkal. By the order dated 04.04.2024, Crl.M.P.No.4256 of 2023 was allowed and the

( Uploaded on: 21/10/2026 02:37:26 pm )

CRL A No. 459 of 2024

criminal revision petition was converted as criminal appeal and numbered as Criminal Appeal No.459 of 2024. The relevant portion of the decision in the case of K.Rajalingam (cited supra) is extracted hereunder: “29 (d) In cases, where, the Sessions Court has reversed the order of acquittal passed by the Magistrate and the same has been challenged by the accused before this Court by way of revision petition and the same is pending, the same should be treated as an appeal pending before this Court against the order of acquittal passed by the Magistrate, by disregarding the order passed by the Sessions Court. In all those cases, the complainant must file a transpose petition and the Registry must convert the same as criminal appeals by showing the complainant as the appellant and the accused as the respondent. The Memorandum of grounds of criminal appeal filed before the Sessions Court will be considered as the memorandum of grounds of appeal in the renumbered criminal appeal.”

4. For the sake of convenience and disposal of this appeal, the parties are referred to as the complainant and the accused, as referred to by the trial Court.

5. The complainant has now filed an affidavit and a memo stating that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled out of Court. It is also stated that the petitioner has no objection to withdraw the present appeal.

6. The learned counsel for the accused submitted that when the accused initially challenged the conviction by filing Crl.R.C.No.162 of 2020, a petition seeking suspension of sentence in Crl.M.P.No.1198 of 2020 in Crl.R.C.No.162

( Uploaded on: 21/10/2026 02:37:26 pm )

CRL A No. 459 of 2024

of 2020 has been filed. This Court, by an order dated 30.01.2020, suspended the sentence, subject to the condition that the accused should appear before the trial Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m., until the disposal of this criminal revision. The learned counsel submitted that the accused has been complying with this condition till date.

7. In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties and amicable settlement of the dispute, the complainant seeks liberty to withdraw the present appeal.

8. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant/complainant, and also taking into account the settlement arrived at between the parties and also the appellant/complainant stated that he has no objection to withdraw the criminal case, the judgment of acquittal and discharge of the accused dated 09.11.2018 passed in CC.No.135 of 2013 by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Namakkal, stands confirmed. The condition imposed on the accused to appear before the trial Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m., in the order dated 30.01.2020 is no longer required.

( Uploaded on: 21/10/2026 02:37:26 pm )

CRL A No. 459 of 2024

9. With the above observation and direction, this Criminal appeal is disposed of. 17-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No JD To

1. The Learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Namakkal.

2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

( Uploaded on: 21/10/2026 02:37:26 pm )

CRL A No. 459 of 2024

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J. JD CRL A No. 459 of 2024 17-09-2026

( Uploaded on: 21/10/2026 02:37:26 pm )