A.Benet v. M.Jerom
Case brief
What is this about?
In a criminal leave petition seeking leave to appeal an acquittal, the High Court refused leave. It held that the trial court correctly found no dishonest intention to attract cheating charges, and the acquittal was not perverse under Apex Court precedent.
What did the court decide?
Leave to appeal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. was denied and the Criminal Leave Petition was dismissed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN
TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/20TH BHADRA 1934
Crl.L.P..No. 335 of 2012
CC.483/2006 of J.M.F.C.-II,TRIVANDRUM
PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT:
A.BENET VIPIN HOUSE, T.C.44/376, WATTS ROAD VALLAKKADAVU (PO), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM
SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW
SRI.K.S.HARIDAS
SRI.V.RENJITH KUMAR
RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED & STATE:
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should grant leave to file an appeal against the order of acquittal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C.
Whether the petitioner has made out a prima facie case to support a challenge against the finding of no dishonest intention in the transaction.
Whether the impugned judgment of acquittal constitutes a perverse one warranting interference by the appellate court.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
A.BENET VIPIN HOUSE
- respondent
STATE OF KERALA
- respondent
M.JEROME
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court