CRL RC/811/2026 of J. Rahul Vs J. Thangaraj
CRL RC No. 811 of 2026
__________
Page1 of 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.04.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
CRL RC No. 811 of 2026
and Crl.M.P.Nos.6230 and 6231 of 2026
J.Rahul, S/o.Jayasuriyan
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
J.Thangaraj, S/o.Janarthanam
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: This Criminal Revision petition is filed under Section 438 & 442 BNSS,
to call for the entire records in C.A.No.14 of 2025 on the file of the learned
District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu and set aside the judgment dated
09.09.2025 passed by learned Principal District Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu
dismissing Criminal appeal No.14 of 2025 against C.C.No.61 of 2022 on the
file of learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court (Magisterial Level) at
Alandur, Chengalpattu District dated 03.12.2024 and to allow the criminal
revision case.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.P.Prem Kumar
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the judgment
passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu dated
09.09.2025 in C.A.No.14 of 2025.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL RC No. 811 of 2026
__________
Page2 of 4
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. On perusal of the order passed by the learned District and Sessions
Judge, Chengalpattu, it was not on merit. The learned District and Sessions
Judge, Chengalpattu has passed the following order:
“Appellant called absent, No representation. Notice to respondent not
taken. Sufficient Opportunities provided to the appellant. Hence Crimi nal
Appeal is dismissed for default.”
4. From a perusal of the impugned order, it discloses that the learned
Judge has summarily dismissed the appeal without going into the records. As
per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bani Singh Vs. State of
Uttar Pradesh reported in (1996) 4 SCC 720 whenever an appeal is filed, it is
the duty of the appellant Court to peruse the records and the judgment of the
Trial Court, and thereafter, to pass a reasoned judgment.
5. It is also relevant to refer the judgment of the Hon’ble Suprem e Court
in K.Muruganandam Vs. State reported in (2021) 20 SCC 642 , where the
Hon’ble Supreme Court has heavily come down against the order passed in a
Criminal Appeal only on the basis of a non prosecution. The Hon’ble Supreme
Court has held that the Appellate Court is obliged to proceed with the hearing of
the case only after appointing an Amicus Curiae and in any case, the appeal
cannot be dismissed merely because of non-representation or default of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL RC No. 811 of 2026
__________
Page3 of 4
advocate for the accused. This position has already been settled in Kabira Vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 1981 Supp SCC 76 and Mohd.Sukur Ali Vs.
State of Assam reported in (2011) 4 SCC 729.
6. However, in the present case, the appellate Court, merely noting the
absence of the appellant and without examining the records available be fore it,
has passed the impugned order, which is contrary to the law laid dow n by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court. Hence, this Court finds that the said order is
unsustainable and the judgment is to be set aside and the matter is to be remitted
back for fresh disposal.
7. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the judgment of the Appe llate
Court is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the appe llate court for fresh
consideration in accordance with law. Connected miscellaneous petit ions are
closed.
08.04.2026
mp
To
1. The District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL RC No. 811 of 2026
__________
Page4 of 4
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
mp
CRL OP No. 811 of 2026
08.04.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis