The High Court modified the appellant's sentence to imprisonment till the rising of the court and fixed compensation at Rs. 80,000 instead of the original fine, while confirming the conviction for cheque dishonour.
Imprisonment reduced to till rising of court; directed to pay compensation of Rs. 80,000 in lieu of original fine.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI
TUESDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2011 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1933
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 311 of 2005()
----------------------------CC.913/1998 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHERTHALA CRA.116/2002 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, ALAPPUZHA
REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED
P.SHAMS,S/O.PAREEKUTTY, PALATHARA HOUSE,AROOKUTTY P.O., CHERTHALA.
BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH
RESPONDENT(S):
ADV. SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SABU SREEDHAR
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
**M.C.HARI RANI, J * * * * * * * * * * * *** Crl.R.P.No.311 of 2005
Dated this the 21st day of June 2011
O R D E R
The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month as per judgment dated 16/04/2002 in C.C.No.913/98. The conviction and sentence imposed by the lower court was confirmed by the appellate court (vide judgment dated 12/10/2004 in Crl.A.No.116/2002).
Crl.R.P.No.311/05
2
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The revision petitioner prays that the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed by the courts below may be avoided and he is ready to pay/deposit the entire cheque amount of Rs.75,000/- as compensation within a period of six months. It is also prayed to exempt the revision petitioner from payment of fine amount as ordered by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court. The learned counsel for the complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor did not oppose the prayer.
Crl.R.P.No.311/05
3
revision petitioner is granted four months time to pay/deposit Rs.80,000/- as compensation to the complainant and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months.
b) The impugned concurrent verdict of guilty and conviction of the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are confirmed.
(c) He is directed under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to pay/deposit Rs.80,000/- (Rupees eighty thousand only) as compensation on or before 21/10/2011 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The amount if deposited shall be released to the complainant on proper application.
(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
jsr
// True Copy// PA to Judge
Crl.R.P.No.311/05 4
Crl.R.P.No.311/05 5
Crl.R.P.No.311/05
6
M.C.HARI RANI, J
Crl.R.P.No.311/05
7
Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2001
ORDER
17th DAY OF JUNE 2001
Crl.R.P.No.311/05 8
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to modify the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed by the lower courts.
Whether to exempt the appellant from payment of the original fine and fix a compensation amount.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
P. Shams
P. R. Radhakrishnan
The State of Kerala
M. C. Hari Rani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
