M.R.Sudha v. K.Murugan
Case brief
What is this about?
Special leave against acquittal under Section 138 NI(Act) treated failed as trial court allowed accused to rebut statutory presumption via evidence showing cheque was security for chitty not discharged liability.
What did the court decide?
Special leave to appeal is dismissed; the trial court's acquittal is affirmed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.THANKAPPAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2007 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1928
Crl.L.P..No. 148 of 2007()
-------------------------CC.740/2003 of J.M.F.C.-I,ATTINGAL
PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT:
M.R. SUDHA, W/O.MANIKANTAN, P.S.N.MANDIR, KACHERI JUNCTION, ATTINGAL.
BY ADV. SRI.T.D.ROBIN
RESPONDENTS: ACCUSED & STATE:
- K.M. MURUGAN, KOYIND SILVER PALACE, PALACE ROAD, ATTINGAL.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the special leave to appeal against the acquittal of the accused in a cheque dishonour case under Section 138 of the N.I.Act should be allowed given the evidence adduced by the petitioner.
Whether the presumption under Sections 139 and 138 of the N.I.Act was rebutted by the accused.
Whether the trial court's findings that the evidence of the petitioner was insufficient warrant interference by this Court.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M.R. SUDHA
- respondent
K.M. MURUGAN
- respondent
STATE OF KERALA
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court