Allowed

Kuttappan v. Unnikrishnan and Another

Kerala HC15 Jul 2009Crl.Rev.Pet/2283/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal revision petition challenged a judgment confirming conviction but modifying sentence for cheque dishonour. The court, noting a pre-existing settlement between parties, granted permission to compound the offence, accepted it as voluntary, and declared it as having the effect of acquittal under Section 320(8) CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Permission to compound the offence was granted; criminal revision petition dismissed as composition entered and acquittal effected.

Kuttappan Vs Unnikrishnan and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2009 / 24TH ASHADHA 1931

¶5

CRL.REV.PET.NO. 2283 OF 2009()

¶6

--------------------------------------------CRA.862/2007 OF ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR CC.1044/2005 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURTI,CHALAKUDY

¶7

REVN. PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶8

---------------------------------------------------------------

¶9

KUTTAPPAN,AGED 64 YEARS,S/O.KANDAN, KUTHIRAVATTATH, KALLOOR VADAKKUMURI VILLAGE, KADUKUTTY,THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.JOHN NUMPELI (JUNIOR) SRI.P.V.PAULSON

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT

¶12

---------------------------------------------------------------------

¶13

1. UNNIKRISHNAN,S/O.PARAMASHWARA MENON, KAPPILIATH HOUSE,KAKKULISSERY VILLAGE,IRANIKULAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶14

2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,ERNAKULAM.

¶15

ADV. SRI.P.L.JOY FOR R1

¶16

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI P.R. JAYAKRISHNAN

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FORCE ADMISSION ON 15/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.

¶19

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL. R.P. NO.2283 of 2009

¶20

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 15^th day of July, 2009

¶21

This revision is in challenge of judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thrissur in Crl. Appeal No.862 of 2007 confirming conviction but modifying sentence of petitioner for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, “the Act”).

¶22

Petitioner and respondent No.1 filed Crl.M.A No.6891 of 2009 reporting settlement and seeking permission to compound the offence.

¶23

It is seen from application No.6891 of 2009 that parties have settled the dispute out of court. There is no reason to think that the composition is not voluntary. Offence under Section 138 of the Act is made compoundable under Section 147 of the Act. Hence permission is granted and Crl.M.A. No.6891 of 2009 is allowed. The composition entered between petitioner and respondent No.1 is accepted and that shall have the effect of acquittal of the petitioner under Section 320(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶24

Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of as above.

¶25

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶26

vsv

Kuttappan v. Unnikrishnan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuttappan v. Unnikrishnan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Beena Vs State of Kerala

Jishi.P. Vs State of Kerala

Mathewkunju Mathew Vs Binoy Thomas and Sate of Kerala

Sunil Kumar Vs the State of Kerala

Moni P.K. Vs K.P.Ramesh

Annie Antony Vs State of Kerala