ANANDHA VADIVELU Vs. KANNAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been preferred against the order passed in Crl.R.P.No.29/2008, on the file of the III Additional Sessions Court, Puducherry, dated 06.02.2009, against the order in C.C.No.480/2004 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry on 28.12.2007.

(2.) The respondent/complainant herein has preferred a complaint against the revision petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and the same was taken on file as C.C.No.480/2004. Since the revision petitioner has not paid the process and not taken the steps, the said complaint was dismissed under Section 204(4) of Cr.P.C. Hence, the respondent/complainant has preferred the revision in Crl.R.P.No.29/2008 before the Additional Sessions Court, Puducherry. The learned Judge, allowed the petition, stating that the respondent herein, is entitled to restore the matter and issue summons to the accused and given a direction to the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry, to dispose the case in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity to both sides.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submitted that in the order passed in Crl.R.P.No.29/2008, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, in para-6 of his judgment, specifically mentioned that "the respondent/accused is having obtained a huge amount from the complainant and has issued a cheque knowing fully well that he has no sufficient funds in his account, the respondent/accused cannot be allowed to go away scot-free for minor flaws or on technical reasons." Without deciding the case on merit, the revisional Court made an observation that the revision petitioner/accused herein has borrowed huge amount and issued cheques and taking advantage of minor flaws. So the observation of the revisional Court is illegal and hence, he prayed for expunging the observation of the revisional Court and allowing this revision.