Madras High Court
Mr.P.T.Moideen @ Moidu vs Mr.N.R.Senthilkumar on 26 July, 2023
Author: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
Bench: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
Crl.R.C.No.1260 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.07.2023
CORAM:
The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Crl.R.C.No.1260 of 2019
Mr.P.T.Moideen @ Moidu ...Petitioner/Appellant/
Complainant
-Vs-
Mr.N.R.Senthilkumar ...Respondent/Respondent/
Accused
Prayer:- Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with 401
of Cr.P.C, to set aside the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge of the
Nilgiris at Udhagamandalam in C.A.No.65 of 2018 dated 29.07.2019
confirming the judgment and sentence passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Udhagamandalam in S.T.C.No.848 of 2013 dated 11.09.2018
and call for the records and acquit the Petitioner from all the charges.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.P.Prakash Paul
For Respondent : M/s.R.Saritha
for Mr.J.Bharathiraja
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
Crl.R.C.No.1260 of 2019
ORDER
When the case came up for hearing on 21.06.2023, learned Single Judge who was presiding over this Roster had directed the Registry to call for remarks from the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam, in S.T.C.No.848 of 2013 dated 11.09.2018 as to whether the condition order had been complied with or not. The Registry was also directed to issue summons to the Revision Petitioner/Accused for his appearance before this Court on 19.07.2023.
2.On 19.07.2023, when the case came up for hearing in the list, the learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner sought an adjournment. Therefore, the case was adjourned to 26.07.2023.
3.Today, 26.07.2023, the learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner is present in Court along with the Revision Petitioner.
4.To the query of this Court to the Revision Petitioner, he states that by the time this Court had granted suspension of sentence and bail, the COVID-19 lockdown had intervened. Therefore, he was in financial https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6 Crl.R.C.No.1260 of 2019 difficulty and he was unable to deposit the amount of Rs.1 lakh before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam, but he had executed the sureties and the bail bond.
5.To the query of this Court after the COVID-19 lockdown that he had not deposited the amount before the Court concerned. He submitted that he is unable to deposit as he is now working as a helper in a hotel. The representation of the Revision Petitioner cannot at all be accepted.
6.Considering the fact that on 19.06.2023, the learned Single Judge of this Court had sought remarks from the Court, suspecting the inclination of the Revision Petitioner in not proceeding with arguments after having filed this Criminal Revision Case. In cases of this nature when the Trial Court judgment is confirmed in Appeal, Revision Case, which is filed only to protract the proceedings and not with the bona fide intention to dispose of the case. Therefore, based on the experience of the Judges, the learned Single Judge had sought remarks from the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6 Crl.R.C.No.1260 of 2019
7.Accordingly, remarks had been received from the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam, in D.No.1290/2023 dated 13.07.2023, in which it is stated that the Accused before the Trial Court, the Revision Petitioner herein had not deposited the amount till date.
8.From the remarks offered by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam, and the direction of the learned Single Judge of this Court as per order dated 21.06.2023, this Criminal Revision Case does not have any merit and the conduct of the Revision Petitioner is not found fair.
9.Therefore, in the light of the above developments and the subsequent conduct of the Revision Petitioner after obtaining order of suspension of the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him as Accused in S.T.C.No.843 of 2013 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam, which was confirmed in Appeal by the learned Principal District Judge, Udhagamandalam, by dismissing the Appeal in Criminal Appeal.No.65 of 2018 in not complying with the orders of this Court in depositing Rs.1,00,000/- before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam, even after four years from the date of the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6 Crl.R.C.No.1260 of 2019 order suspending the sentence of imprisonment, this Criminal Revision Case does not have merit.
10.In the light of the above discussion, this Civil Revision Case stands dismissed and this Court directs the Revision Petitioner to surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam, within 15 days, failing which the Respondent will initiate steps to declare him as proclaimed offender.
26.07.2023 cda Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order NOTE: Issue Order Copy on 27.07.2023 To
1.The Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam.
2.The Sessions Judge, Nilgiris, Udhagamandalam. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6 Crl.R.C.No.1260 of 2019 SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J., cda Crl.R.C.No.1260 of 2019 26.07.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6