1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :07.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN Crl.R.C.(MD) No.113 of 2011 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 V.Kumaresan .. Revision Petitioner/sole accused Vs. S.Sivasubramania Marthandan ..Respondent/Complainant Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C praying to set aside the order dated 08.12.2010 passed in Cr.M.P.No.100 of 2010 in C.A.No.14 of 2010 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Virudhunagar. For petitioner : Mr.P.Santhanakrishnan ORDER The petitioner is the appellant in C.A.No.14 of 2010, on the file of the Fast Track Court, Virudhunagar. 2. The petitioner faced prosecution for the alleged commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar. The said Court vide judgment dated 10.06.2010, has found the petitioner herein guilty under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and imposed a punishment of 3 months Simple Imprisonment and directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- by way of compensation and challenging the vires of the same, the petitioner has preferred an appeal in A.S.No.14 of 2010. Pending disposal of the same, the petitioner herein took up an application for marking additional documents in Cr.M.P.No.100 of 2010. The Fast Track Court, Virudhunagar has partly allowed the application and rejected the request of the petitioner in respect of summoning the Head Clerk of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Virudhunagar and the Head Clerk of Court of Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virdhunagar and challenging the said portion of the order, the present revision has been filed. 3. Heard the submissions of Mr.P.Santhanakrishan, learned counsel for the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the respondent/ complainant has filed a civil suit and a criminal complaint and the presence of the Court officials are necessary and without their presence the said documents cannot be marked. 5. This Court on perusal of the materials available on record is of the considered opinion that the said submission lacks merits and substance and the petitioner can very well obtain and produce the certified copies of those documents and file it before the Court, if so advised. For marking those documents, the presence of the Court officials is not necessary. 6. Hence, this petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 is dismissed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(LA) /TRUE COPY/ Assistant Registrar To: The Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court,Virudhunagar. +1cc to Mr.P.Santhanakrishnan, Advocate SR.No.11792 Crl.R.C.(MD) No.113 of 2011 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 sj PA/21.03.2011/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/