Dismissed

P.v.Sudhakaran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Mar 2012Crl.MC/129/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court dismissed a quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC filed by the second accused. The petitioner argued that his company was under liquidation, preventing asset custody and liability discharge. The Court upheld the trial court's finding that winding-up proceedings do not affect prosecution under Section 138 NI Act.

What did the court decide?

The petition to quash further proceedings under Section 138 NI Act was dismissed.

P.v.Sudhakaran Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE. P.S.GOPINATHAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2012/11TH PHALGUNA 1933

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 129 of 2012 ()

¶6

ST.NO.522/2011 IN CRMP.2346/2011 of J.M.F.C.- I, OTTAPPALAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/2ND ACCUSED:

¶8

P.V.SUDHAKARAN AGED 41 YEARS,S/O.VELAYUDHAN FORMERLY CHAIRMAN-CUMMANAGING DIRECTOR SREELAKSHMI KURIES AND LOANS PRIVATE LIMITED, PALAKKAD RESIDING AT PALLAKKAL PARAMBU AYALOOR POST,NENMARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,PIN-678510.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH

¶10

SRI.SUMODH MADHAVAN NAIR

¶11

RESPONDENT/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA

¶13

REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶14

HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

2. P.HARIDAS,

¶16

AGED 44 YEARS,S/O.PARAMESWARAN,PRABHUMANDIRAM

¶17

UNDARAYYAR ROAD,OTTAPALAM-679101,OTTAPALAM TALUK

¶18

PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶19

3. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR,

¶20

OFFICE OF THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR

¶21

HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-682031.

¶22

OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR BY SRI.K.MONI

¶23

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

¶26

P.S.GOPINATHAN, J

¶27

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

¶28

Crl.M.C.No. 129 OF 2012

¶29

-------------------------Dated this the 1^st day of March, 2012.

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

In this petition under Section 482 of the Code of

¶32

Criminal Procedure, the petitioner, who is the second

¶33

accused in S.T.No.522/2011 on the file of the Judicial

¶34

Magistrate of the First Class-I, Ottapalam seeks an order to quash all further proceedings in pursuance to Annexure A3 complaint filed by the second respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶35

It is seen that the petitioner filed a petition

¶36

before the trial court to stop all further proceedings with a plea that the company in which the petitioner was the Managing Director is under liquidation and that the winding up procedure started as early as 31-5-2010 and that the cheque in dispute was issued on 17-4-2010 and the cheque was dishonoured only on 17-6-2010. That is after initiation of winding up procedure. The trial court considered the contention of the petition and rejected the petition by

¶37

Crl.M.C.No. 129 OF 2012 2

¶38

Annexure A4 order after entering into a finding that the winding proceedings would no way affect the prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. I fully agree with the findings of the trial court. I find no reason to interfere with the prosecution in exercise of the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶39

In the result, this petition is dismissed without prejudice to the defence of the petitioner.

¶40

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the liquidation proceedings were initiated, the petitioner is not in custody of the assets of the company and he is not in a position to discharge the liability. That is a matter to be looked into by the trial court while awarding sentence.

¶41

P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE

¶42

amk

P.v.Sudhakaran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.v.Sudhakaran v. State of Kerala

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

Muhammed Hassan H Shake Vs State of Kerala

Siby Joseph Vs the Kecheri Chit and Finances, Changanassery

P.P.Poulose Vs K.P.Kuriachan

P.S.Varghese @ Scariya Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Annakkutty Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala