Naseer Ali vs Sathishraja

Court
Madras High Court

CRL RC(MD)No.1081 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved On: 15.10.2026
Delivered On: 03.11.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.MURUGESAN
CRL RC(MD) No. 1081 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD010689222026} AND
CRL.MP(MD)Nos. 12857 & 12859 of 2026
Naseer Ali ... Petitioner
Vs.
Sathishraja ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision filed under Section 438 r/w 442 BNSS to
call for the records and to set aside the summary dismissal of the appeal
dated 12.12.2025 in Crl.A.No.170 of 2025 on the file of the learned II
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli by which
confirming the judgment in STC.No.160 of 2020 on the file of he learned
Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi dated 28.03.2025 and remit back to the lower
appellate Court for fresh hearing.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan,
for Mr.M.Viji
For Respondent : Mr.S.Yogeswaran
ORDER
Heard and admitted.
__________
Page  1  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 10:33:09 am )

CRL RC(MD)No.1081 of 2026
02. With the consent of both parties, this criminal revision was
taken up for final hearing on 15.10.2026.
03. Challenging the judgment dated 12.12.2025 of the II
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli, hereinafter
referred to as ‘the appellate court’, in the criminal appeal in CA
No.170/2025, confirming the conviction and sentence of the Judicial
Magistrate, Lalgudi, hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial court’, in STC
No.160/2020, the revision petitioner/sole accused has filed this
Criminal Revision Petition under S.438 BNSS.
04. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred
hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking in this
criminal revision, 'the revision petitioner' and 'the revision respondent',
unless the context otherwise requires.
05. Prefatory facts are that the revision respondent had filed a
complaint against the revision petitioner under S.138 NI Act in STC
No.160/2020 on the file of the trial court, that finding him guilty, the
trial court convicted the revision petitioner and sentenced him, that
challenging such conviction and sentence, the revision petitioner had
filed a criminal appeal in CA No.170/2025 on the file of the appellate
court and that the appellate court, in view of the order of this court in
Crl.OP(MD)No.12314/2025 ‘directing the jurisdictional police to take
necessary steps to execute the warrant issued by the trial court in STC
No.160/2020’, has summarily dismissed the criminal appeal, recording
that ‘Appellant called absent. No representation. Respondent
presented’ (extracted as such).
__________
Page  2  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 10:33:09 am )

CRL RC(MD)No.1081 of 2026
06. Challenging such dismissal of the criminal appeal in CA
No.170/2025, the revision petitioner has filed this criminal revision.
07. Heard both sides, and perused all the materials available.
08. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit
such summary dismissal of the criminal appeal in view of the order of
this Court in Crl.OP(MD)No.12314/2025 ‘directing the jurisdictional
police to take necessary steps to execute the warrant issued by the trial
court in STC No.160/2020 would show that the appellate court has not
applied its judicial mind and that the impugned judgment of the
appellate court is obviously erroneous and perverse.
09. Learned counsel for the revision respondent would submit
that a considered order may be passed.
10. Point for determination is whether the revision petitioner is
entitled to get an order, allowing this criminal revision and setting
aside such summary dismissal of the criminal appeal in CA
No.170/2025 on the file of the appellate court?
11. Impugned judgment would read as under:
‘Appellant called absent. No representation.
Respondent presented. The Hon’ble High Court order
produced. Hon’ble High Court order to execute NBW
against Appellant. Hence this appeal is dismissed
summarily.’
__________
Page  3  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 10:33:09 am )

CRL RC(MD)No.1081 of 2026
12. It is not known whether the appellate court has dismissed the
criminal appeal for non prosecution or it has dismissed the criminal
appeal as the consequence of the order of this Court in
Crl.OP(MD)No.12314/2025 or it has dismissed the criminal appeal
summarily .
13. If we take it as a dismissal for non prosecution,
(a) the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Bani Singh and Others V
State of UP (1996 SCC (4) 720), has held as under:
‘….. The plain language of Section 385 makes it clear that if the
Appellate Court does not consider the appeal fit for summary
dismissal, it 'must' call for the record and Section 386 mandates
that after the record is received, the Appellate Court may dispose
of the appeal after hearing the accused or his counsel. Therefore,
the plain language of Sections 385-386 does not contemplate
dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution simpliciter. On the
contrary, the Code envisages disposal of the appeal on merits
after perusal and scrutiny of the record. The law clearly expects
the Appellate Court to dispose of the appeal on merits, not
merely by perusing the reasoning of the trial court in the
judgment, but by cross-checking the reasoning with the evidence
on record with a view to satisfying itself that the reasoning and
findings recorded by the trial court are consistent with the
material on record. The law, therefore, does not envisage the
dismissal of the appeal for default or non-prosecution but only
contemplates disposal on merits after perusal of the record.’
__________
Page  4  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 10:33:09 am )

CRL RC(MD)No.1081 of 2026
(b) In Madan Lal Kapoor V Rajiv Thapar and Others (2007)
3 SCC (Cri) 437) , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under:
‘ 4 . The matter relates to administration of criminal
justice. As held by this Court, a criminal matter cannot be
dismissed for default and it must be decided on merits.
(c) K.S.Panduranga V State Of Karnataka (2013 (3) SCC
721) is also a case where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as
under:
‘22 . From the aforesaid decision, the principles that
can be culled out are (i) that the High Court cannot dismiss
an appeal for non- prosecution simpliciter without
examining the merits; (ii) that the court is not bound to
adjourn the matter if both the appellant or his
counsel/lawyer are absent; (iii) that the court may, as a
matter of prudence or indulgence, adjourn the matter but it
is not bound to do so; (iv) that it can dispose of the appeal
after perusing the record and judgment of the trial court; (v)
that if the accused is in jail and cannot, on his own, come to
court, it would be advisable to adjourn the case and fix
another date to facilitate the appearance of the accused-
appellant if his lawyer is not present, and if the lawyer is
absent and the court deems it appropriate to appoint a
lawyer at the State expense to assist it, nothing in law
would preclude the court from doing so; and (vi) that if the
case is decided on merits in the absence of the appellant,
the higher court can remedy the situation.’
__________
Page  5  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 10:33:09 am )

CRL RC(MD)No.1081 of 2026
(d) Therefore, having regard to the aforesaid decisions, this court
holds that a criminal appeal cannot be dismissed for non prosecution.
14. If we take it as a dismissal as the consequence of the order of
this Court in Crl.OP(MD)No.12314/2025 where the revision petitioner
is not a party, this court has simply directed the jurisdictional police to
take necessary steps to execute the warrant issued by the trial court in
STC No.160/2020 but not directed the appellate court to dismiss the
criminal appeal in CA No.170/2025 without going into the merits of
the criminal appeal. In short, the dismissal of the criminal appeal as the
consequence of the order of this court in Crl.OP(MD)No.12314/2025
is also not sustainable.
15. If we take it as a summary dismissal, a criminal appeal, once
admitted and notice served upon the respondent as under S.426 BNSS,
cannot be dismissed summarily as under S.425 BNSS where too, the
criminal appeal filed under S.423 BNSS cannot be dismissed
summarily unless the appellant has had a reasonable opportunity of
being heard.
16. Therefore, such dismissal of the criminal appeal in CA
No.170/2025 vide the impugned judgment of the appellate court, as
discussed above, is erroneous and perverse, liable to be interfered with.
17. Ergo, this court holds that the revision petitioner is entitled to
get an order, allowing this criminal revision and setting aside such
summary dismissal of the criminal appeal in CA No.170/2025 on the
file of the appellate court, and this point is answered, accordingly.
__________
Page  6  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 10:33:09 am )

CRL RC(MD)No.1081 of 2026
18. In fine, this criminal revision filed by the revision
petitioner/accused shall stand allowed,
(a) setting aside the judgment dated 12.12.2025 of the appellate
court in CA No.170/2025, and
(b) remanding the criminal appeal in CA No.170/2025 to the
appellate court for disposal in accordance with law, within three
months from the date of the receipt of this order. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
03.11.2026
Index : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
gns
To
1.II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli
2.The Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi

__________
Page  7  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 10:33:09 am )

CRL RC(MD)No.1081 of 2026
B.MURUGESAN, J.
gns
Order made in
CRL.RC.(MD)No.1081 of 2026
03.11.2026
__________
Page  8  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 10/11/2026 10:33:09 am )