Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1572 (MAD)

P. Nanga Goundan v. P. Poovathal

2011-03-19

R.MALA

body2011
Judgment :- 1. The revision petitioner herein is an accused in C.C.No.152 of 2005 and C.C.No.606 of 2005 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Salem. In C.C.No.606 of 2005, the petitioner/accused stands convicted for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and also to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and in C.C.No.152 of 2005, he stands convicted for an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months and to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation, against which the petitioner herein has preferred appeal in C.A.No.140 of 2006 and C.A.No.141 of 2006, in which the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court was confirmed, against which the present revision petitions have been preferred by this petitioner/accused. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused submits that the matter is now compromised and the revision petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs.75,000/- before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Salem in both the cases. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/complainant admits that the matter has been compromised and the respondent/complainant is also ready to compound the offences. It is further submitted that a petition under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is also now filed before this Court seeking permission of the Court for compounding the offences. 4. Both complainant/respondent and accused/petitioner and their respective counsel are present. This Court has considered the submissions made by both side counsel. 5. In view of the fact that the matters are being compromised and as the complainant/respondent is also prepared to compound the offences, the petitions in M.P.No.1 of 2011 in Crl.R.C.No.29 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 in Crl.R.C.No.30 of 2008 filed before this Court under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are allowed. 6. As the offence has been compounded, these Criminal Revision Petitions are allowed and the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner in C.C.Nos.152 and 606 of 2005 by the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Salem are hereby set aside and the petitioner/accused is acquitted from the charges levelled against him in both the cases. Consequently, connected M.P.No.1 of 2010 is closed. 7. Consequently, connected M.P.No.1 of 2010 is closed. 7. In Crl.R.C.No.30 of 2008, the complainant/respondent is permitted to withdraw a sum of Rs.25,000/- deposited by the petitioner/accused before the Judicial Magistrate II, Salem in C.C.No.606 of 2005. M.P.No.3 of 2008 in Crl.R.C.No.30 of 2008 is allowed. In Crl.R.C.No.29 of 2008, the respondent/complainant is permitted to withdraw a sum of Rs.50,000/- deposited by the petitioner/accused before the Judicial Magistrate II, Salem in C.C.No.152 of 2005. M.P.No.3 of 2008 in Crl.R.C.No.29 of 2008 is allowed. 8. In the above terms, these Criminal Revision cases are disposed of. M.P.No.1 of 2011 and M.P.No.3 of 209 in Crl.R.C.No.29 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 and M.P.No.3 of 2009 in Crl.R.C.No.30 of 2008 are allowed.