Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Jessy Alex Binoy Vs v. a. Thomas and Anr. — Money Laundering | Bombay HC (2013)

Home
Bombay HC
2013
Jessy Alex Binoy Vs v. a. Thomas and Anr.Jessy Alex Binoy v. v. a. Thomas and Anr.

Disposed

Jessy Alex Binoy v. v. a. Thomas and Anr.

Bombay HC15 Jul 2013REVN/104/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the revision applicant's bail application. The court noted that the applicant had deposited Rs.4 lakhs as settlement compensation for a cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Consequently, the criminal application for quashment was allowed.

What did the court decide?

The application for quashing of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was allowed. Both the bail application and the criminal revision application were disposed of.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The application for quashing of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was allowed. Both the bail application and the criminal revision application were disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act should be quashed in view of the settlement of the matter.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

In proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, where a settlement of Rs.4 lakhs has been made and deposited upon conviction, the criminal proceedings should be quashed under Section 147. The court granted liberty to the complainant to withdraw the deposited amount and dismissed the requests for bail and quashing on merits, disposing of both applications.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

A

appr100-revn104-13.sxw

1/2

Pvr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.100 OF 2013 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.104 OF 2013 WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.104 OF 2013

Mrs.Jessy Alex Binoy. …Applicant versus 1.Mr.V.A.Thomas & Anr. ...Respondents

Mr.Pawan Mali, for Applicant.

Ms.Jessy Alex Binoy- applicant in person present.

Mr.V.A.Thomas, Respondent no.1 in person present.

Mr.A.R.Patil, APP for State-Respondent no.2.

CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.

DATED : 15^th July, 2013

P.C. :

Heard.

The proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act culminated in conviction against the revision applicant, are questioned.

The learned Counsel submits, compensation amount of Rs.4 lakhs is deposited in this Court or before Trial Court by the applicant against

2/2

Pvr

appr100-revn104-13.sxw

the receipt. The photostat copies of receipts of deposits are taken on record. The cheque amount is Rs.3 lakhs.

Shri.V.A.Thomas – original Complainant present in this Court. He has placed photostat copy of Pan Card and retirement card, same are taken on record.

The complainant says, he has settled the matter with the accused-applicant by accepting Rs.4 lakhs as final settlement.

The criminal application for quashment is allowed, by virtue of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The original complainant is at liberty to withdraw the deposited amount from the learned JMFC at Pune on proper identification.

The revision applicant to deposit consolidated costs of Rs.10,000/- in both the revision and application, with the High Court Legal Services Committee upto 30.7.2013, failure today's order shall be treated as terminated.

Both the revision and application are disposed of.

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act should be quashed in view of the settlement of the matter.

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Negotiable Instruments Act147138

Parties & counsel

AI extract

applicant
Jessy Alex Binoy
respondent
V.A.Thomas
respondent
State

Coram

AI extract

K.U.CHANDIWAL

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Bombay HC
Decided on: 15 Jul 2013 · July
Registered: 8 Mar 2013
Case no.: REVN/104/2013
CNR: HCBM010107572013
Topic: Money Laundering
Bench: K.u. Chandiwal
Disposal: OTHERS DISPOSED OFF

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from K.u. Chandiwal

Amish Jayant Dharod Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.
12 Jul 2013
M/S. Paranjpe Construction Companny and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.
12 Jul 2013
Gajanan Bapu Jadhav and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra
12 Jul 2013
Jasmin Bhogilal Shah Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.
15 Jul 2013
Amarjeet Nirangan Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.
15 Jul 2013
Jessy Alex Binoy Vs v. a. Thomas and Anr.
15 Jul 2013

Cite this judgement

Jessy Alex Binoy v. v. a. Thomas and Anr., REVN/104/2013 (BOM), decided on 15 July 2013.

The Bombay High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Negotiable Instruments Act147 · 138

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

K.U.CHANDIWAL

Parties & counsel