LAWS(MAD)-2014-8-72

SELVARAJ Vs. VENKATACHALAPATHY

Decided On August 04, 2014
SELVARAJ Appellant
V/S
SELVARAJ Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal No.20 of 2014 has been preferred against the judgment of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Case, dated 26.12.2013 pronounced in Crl.A.No.13 of 2011 reversing the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pudukottai in S.T.C.No.124 of 2008. The said case in S.T.C.No.124 of 2008 came to be instituted on a complaint against the appellant for an alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The trial Court acquitted the appellant herein/accused. As against the acquittal, the complainant preferred an appeal before the lower Appellate Court under Section 372 proviso Cr.P.C. The learned lower Appellate Judge allowed the appeal, set aside the order of acquittal passed by the trial Court, convicted the appellant herein/accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- with a further direction to undergo simple imprisonment for three months in case of default in payment of the fine. As against the above said judgment of the appellate Court, the appellant/accused has preferred Criminal Appeal (MD)No.20 of 2014.

(2.) The respondent in the said Criminal Appeal, namely, the complainant has chosen to file Criminal Revision Case (MD)No.237 of 2014 under Sections 397 read with 401 Cr.PC complaining that the sentence imposed is inadequate and praying for enhancement of punishment. Both the cases are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(3.) The arguments advanced by Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal (MD)No.20 of 2014 who is the respondent in Criminal Revision Case (MD)No.234 of 2014 (accused) and Mr.P.Ganapathisubramanian, learned counsel for the respondent in the Criminal Appeal/Petitioner in the Criminal Revision Case (complainant) are heard. The materials available on record are also perused.