IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26.10.2007
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. MOHAN RAM
Crl. O.P. Nos.28860 to 28863 of 2007
and
M.P. Nos.1, 1, 1 and 1 of 2007
Vijay Dhandapani ..Petitioner in all the Crl.O.Ps.
Vs
K.Ravi
Rep. by Sreeja Ravi ..Respondent in Crl. O.P.28860/2007
Mr.Madan Mohan
Rep. by Sreeja Ravi ..Respondent in Crl. O.P.28861/2007
Sreeja Ravi ..Respondent in Crl. O.P.28862/2007
Jayasree ..Respondent in Crl. O.P.28863/2007
Prayer:
Petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure to withdraw and to transfer C.C.Nos.2364,
2365, 2368 and 2369 of 2005, respectively, pending on the file of
VIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Chennai.
For Petitioner in all the Crl.O.Ps. : Mr.Govindarajan
For Respondent in all the Crl.O.Ps : Mr. T.Ashok Kumar
C O M M O N O R D E R
Learned counsel for the petitioner in each of the petitions
submitted that the petitioner has come forward with the present
petitions seeking for the relief to withdraw and to transfer
C.C.Nos.2364, 2365, 2368 and 2369 of 2005, respectively, pending
on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Chennai.
2. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is the
accused in C.C.Nos.2364, 2365, 2368 and 2369 of 2005,
respectively, for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act filed by the respondent/complainant for the
dishonour of cheques. He further submitted that the petitioner
has good defence on his side to succeed in the case and he is a
practising advocate. It was further submitted by him that right
from the beginning of the cases, there was an undue haste in
conducing trial and during trial he was pressurised to close the
cases by settlement or to face conviction. He also submitted
that the complainants are highly influential persons and are
wielding money and political power due to their association with
film industry. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for
the petitioner that the petitioner is having reasonable
apprehension that in view of the reasons stated above he may not
get fair justice if the same is tried by the VIII Metropolitan
Magistrate Court, Chennai.
3. Per contra, Mr.T.Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the
respondents/complainants in each of the petitions denied the
averments made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and
submitted there is absolutely no fault on the side of the
respondents. He also agreed that the cases in question may be
transferred to any other Court for which the petitioner is
willing and fairly submitted that the respondents/complainants in
each of the petitions are ready to accept the same.
4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the
learned counsel on either side and also perused the entire
materials available on record including the affidavit filed by
the petitioner herein. In view of the nature of allegation
coupled with the fact of apprehension expressed by the
petitioner, this Court is constrained to transfer the cases in
C.C.Nos.2364, 2365, 2368 and 2369 of 2005, respectively, pending
on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Chennai,
to the file of the 12th Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai – 600
104. The VIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Chennai, is hereby
directed to send the case records relating to C.C.Nos.2364, 2365,
2368 and 2369 of 2005, respectively, pending on its file to the
XII Small Causes Court, Chennai. It is also made clear that the
petitioner shall co-operate with the Court to enable the Court
below to dispose of the cases. It is further directed that the
XII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, is directed to dispose of
the cases as expeditiously as possible and more particularly
within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of the
records from the learned VIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court,
Chennai.
5. The criminal original petitions are ordered on the above
terms. Consequently the connected MPs are closed.
srk
To
1. The VIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court
Chennai.
2. The XII Small Causes Court
Chennai.