CRL A/995/2023 of RATHINAM Vs SENTHIL on 11 September 2026

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been filed to set aside the order passed in S.T.C.No.77 of 2020 by the Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Omalur, Salem District, dated 21.07.2023.

2. The appellant, as the complainant, filed a petition under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent in S.T.C.No.77 of 2020

( Uploaded on: 12/10/2026 05:56:48 pm )

CRL A No. 995 of 2023

on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Omalur, Salem District, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 21.07.2023. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.

3. Notice to the respondent through the Court has been served, and the name of the respondent is printed in the cause list. However, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent either in person or through counsel.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has filed a complaint against the respondent under Section 138 of the Act. Upon perusal of the complaint, a sworn statement was recorded, and thereafter, the case number was assigned and a summons was issued to the respondent. The respondent received the summons and appeared before the trial Court, but the trial was yet to commence. Meanwhile, due the absence of the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. The learned counsel further submitted that on 21.07.2023, the complainant met with an accident and was unable to inform his counsel, because of which a condonation petition could not be filed. The case was listed at the stage of commencement of trial. Summarily dismissing the complaint on technical grounds for non-prosecution without considering the evidence and materials on record would amount to a denial of justice. Hence, he prayed for setting aside the impugned order, and the appellant undertook to complete the trial without further delay within a stipulated period.

( Uploaded on: 12/10/2026 05:56:48 pm )

CRL A No. 995 of 2023

5. Notice has been served on the respondent, and sufficient opportunity has been given.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also perused the materials available on record.

7. Considering the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and upon perusal of the materials available on record, it is not in dispute that the case was pending trial and the complaint was dismissed for non- prosecution. This Court is of the view that the substantial justice can be rendered only after hearing the parties through a full-fledged trial. In the case on hand, the matter was admittedly listed at the stage of commencement of trial.

8. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to set aside the order of dismissal. The complaint in S.T.C.No.77 of 2020 is hereby restored to the file of the Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Omalur, Salem District. The learned Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Omalur, Salem District, is directed to take up the case in S.T.C.No.77 of 2020 to its file and complete the trial, within a period of four (4) months from the date of uploading of this order on the High Court Website.

( Uploaded on: 12/10/2026 05:56:48 pm )

CRL A No. 995 of 2023

9. In the result, this Criminal Appeal is allowed. 11-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No JD To

1. The Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Omalur, Salem District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

( Uploaded on: 12/10/2026 05:56:48 pm )

CRL A No. 995 of 2023

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. JD CRL A No. 995 of 2023 11-09-2026

( Uploaded on: 12/10/2026 05:56:48 pm )