Allowed

T.N. Viswanathan v. Moidunni and Another

Kerala HC22 Oct 2009Crl.Rev.Pet/3284/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal revision petition was admitted where the applicant, convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, sought leave to compound the offence. The Court recorded the petitions filed for compounding and acquitted the applicant under Section 147 of the NI Act and Section 320(8) CrPC, subsequently disposing of the revision.

What did the court decide?

Petitions for leave to compound recorded; revision petitioner acquitted under Section 147 NI Act and Section 320(8) CrPC.

T.N. Viswanathan Vs Moidunni and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2009 / 30TH ASWINA 1931

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3284 of 2009()

¶6

--------------------------------------------CRA.388/2007 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, (ADHOC), PALAKKAD ST.2424/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PATTAMBI

¶7

REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ ACCUSED

¶8

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

¶9

T.N. VISWANATHAN, S/O. NARAYANAN, KIZHAKKEKKARAYINMMEL VEEDU, NEDUMKARA AMSOM, DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK.

¶10

BY ADV. MR.P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD)

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT & STATE

¶12

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

¶13

1. MOIDHUNNI, S/O. KUNJAPPU HAJI, ATHANIKKAL VEEDU, NELLIKKATTIR DESOM, THIRUMITTAKKODU AMSOM, OTTAPALAM TALUK.

¶14

2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

R1 BY ADV. MR.K.C.KIRAN

¶16

R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.JAYAKRISHNAN

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

tss

¶19

P.S.Gopinathan, J.

¶20

========================================== Crl.R.P.3284 of 2009

¶21

==========================================

¶22

Dated this the 22^nd day of October, 2009.

¶23

ORDER

¶24

1.The revision petitioner, who is the accused in C.C.No.329 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial

¶25

Magistrate of the First Class-II, Alappuzha was

¶26

prosecuted by the first respondent alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court found him guilty. Accordingly, he was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for two months

¶27

with a direction to pay Rs.40,000/- as compensation to the first respondent with default clause to undergo simple imprisonment for one

¶28

month more. Though an appeal was filed, it was

¶29

dismissed with certain modifications to the

¶30

sentence. Now this revision, assailing the

¶31

legality and correctness of the above conviction

¶32

and sentence.

¶33

CRRP3284/09 -:2:-

¶34

2.Revision petitioner along with the first respondent now filed two petitions as Crl.M.A.Nos.10169 of 2009 and 10170 of 2009 seeking leave to compound the offence and record compounding. Having heard either side, I find no good reason to reject the petitions. Hence, the petitions are recorded and the revision petitioner is acquitted under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 320(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶35

Crl.R.P. is disposed of as above.

¶36

sl.

¶37

P.S.Gopinathan, Judge.

¶38

The words and figures “ C.C.No.329 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Alappuzha ” occurring in the 2^nd and 3^rd lines of the first paragraph of the final order dated 22.10.2009 in Crl.R.P.3284/2009, are corrected and substituted as “ S.T.2424/2004 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pattambi ”, vide order dated 19.11.2009 in Crl.M.A.11160/2009.

¶39

Sd/-Registrar (Judl.)

T.N. Viswanathan v. Moidunni and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.N. Viswanathan v. Moidunni 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

Sudheer Babu Vs Shaji

Shabinesh Kumar Vs Parasmal Lunavat and Another

Dasappan Vs State of Kerala & Anr.

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Mr.G.Soman Vs Mr.v.K.Sasidharan & Another

Radhakrishnan Vs State of Kerala