Allowed

Bell Leasing and Hire Purchase Ltd. v. Shaji.K.and Another

Kerala HC16 Jul 2009Crl.Rev.Pet/2300/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a criminal revision petition challenging the dismissal of a cheque dishonour complaint for failure to take steps. The Court held the delay was not willful due to case transfer confusion and remitted the case for fresh disposal after giving the petitioner an opportunity.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside; case remitted to Magistrate-III, Kochi; petitioner to appear on 20-08-2009.

Bell Leasing and Hire Purchase Ltd. Vs Shaji.K.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

THURSDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2009 / 25TH ASHADHA 1931

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2300 of 2009 -----------------------------ST.422/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOCHI ....................

¶6

REVN. PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT:

¶7

¶8

M/S.BELL LEASING AND HIRE PURCHASE LTD., DOOR NO.40/9715, IST FLOOR, BHAGEERATHA SANTHWANA, CHITTOOR ROAD, KOCHI-18, REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER JAYAPRAKASH N.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN SRI.K.RAJESH SUKUMARAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED & STATE:

¶11

¶12

SHAJI K., S/O.KASIM, THYPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.H.WARD, ALAPPUZHA.

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: SRI C S HRITHWIK

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

THOMAS P JOSEPH, J

¶17

---------------------------------------Crl.R.P.No.2300 of 2009

¶18

Dated this 16^th day of July 2009

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Since order under challenge is one dismissing the complaint under section 204(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with. Heard counsel for petitioner and public prosecutor.

¶21

This revision is in challenge of order dated 09-05-2008 in S.T.No.422 of 2007 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Kochi. Complaint preferred by the petitioner for offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was dismissed as per impugned order for the reason that there was no representation for petitioner and steps were not taken from 17-072007 onwards. Learned counsel submits that the case was originally filed and taken cognizance in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam and thereafter case was transferred to the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kochi. Petitioner was under the impression that the case will be called in the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-1, Kochi but it happened that the case was called in learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Kochi and disposed of on 0905-2008 as aforesaid.

¶22

Learned counsel submits that after the case was transferred to the court at Kochi there were only four postings

¶23

Crl.R.P.No.2300 of 2009 2

¶24

including that on 09-05-2008 and that non appearance in the court below was on account of the above reason. I am inclined to think that non appearance or failure to take steps was not on account of any willful failure or latches on the part of petitioner. Hence I am inclined to give petitioner an opportunity to prosecute complaint.

¶25

Resultantly this revision is allowed. Order under challenge is set aside and the case is remitted to the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Kochi for disposal in accordance with law after giving petitioner an opportunity to take necessary steps. Petitioner shall appear in that court on 20-08-2009.

¶26

THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE

¶27

Sbna/

Bell Leasing and Hire Purchase Ltd. v. Shaji.K.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bell Leasing and Hire Purchase Ltd. v. Shaji.K.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

Sunil Kumar Vs the State of Kerala

Moni P.K. Vs K.P.Ramesh

Annie Antony Vs State of Kerala

Stanley Vs K.S.Roy

Kuttimoodu Vijayan Vs State of Kerala

Mary John Vs Kalyani Sharp India Limited