Allowed

Balakrishnan v. Aboobacker

Kerala HC8 Jun 2012Crl.Rev.Pet/1268/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the conviction and sentence of the accused for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court held that since the legal heirs of the deceased complainant voluntarily compounded the compoundable offence under Section 147 of the Act, the accused was set at liberty and the previous conviction was set aside.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and sentence set aside; accused set at liberty; bail bond cancelled.

Balakrishnan Vs Aboobacker — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/18TH JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1268 of 2012 ()

¶6

JUDGMENTS IN CRA.93/1998 of SESSIONS COURT,THALASSERY AND CC.1227/1995 of J.M.F.C.,MATTANNUR

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER(S):/ACCUSED

¶8

BALAKRISHNAN V.C., S/O. APPU, AGED 49 YEARS, NO OCCUPATION, KOODALY AMSOM, KODOLIPURAM P.O., PATTANNUR.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE (SR.) SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS SMT.CELINE JOSEPH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT(S)(LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES & STATE):

¶11

KANNOTH ABOOBACKER, SAMEERA MANZIL, THALASSERY TALUK, KOLARI VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT (DIED)

¶12

M.P.NABEESU, W/O.ABOOBACKER, SEMEERA MANZIL, KOLARI VILLAGE, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT- 670 101.

¶13

M.P.SAMEERA, D/O.ABOOBACKER, SEMEERA MANZIL, KOLARI VILLAGE, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT-670101.

¶14

M.P.SEENATH, D/O.ABOOBACKER, SEMEERA MANZIL, KOLARI VILLAGE, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670101.

¶15

M.P.KOWLATH, D/O.ABOOBACKER, SEMEERA MANZIL, KOLARI VILLAGE,THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670101.

¶16

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1268 of 2012 () : 2 :

¶17

M.P.MUHAMMED SHEREEF, S/O.ABOOBACKER, SEMEERA MANZIL, KOLARI VILLAGE, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670101.

¶18

M.P.MUHAMMED ASHARAF, S/O.ABOOBACKER, SEMEERA MANZIL, KOLARI VILLAGE, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670101.

¶19

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

¶20

BY ADV. SRI.P.BHARATHAN FOR R2 TO R7 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SEENA RAMACHANDRAN

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶23

Crl.R.P.No.1268 of 2012

¶24

Dated 8^th June, 2012

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The accused in C.C.No.1227 of 1995 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur is the revision petitioner. There is concurrent verdict of conviction under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner. In fact, in the appeal filed as Crl.A.No.93 of 1998 the sentence imposed against the petitioner was modified to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and compensation to the tune of Rs.20,000/- was also awarded with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. It is in the said circumstances that this revision petition has been filed.

¶27

I have heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned counsel for respondents 2 to 7.

¶28

Respondents 2 to 7 are the legal heirs of the first respondent defacto complainant. The complainant is no more. Crl.M.A.No.4322 of 2012 has been filed by respondents 2 to 7, who are the legal heirs of the complainant, to the effect that the case that led to the conviction and sentence of the revision petitioner has been compromised and, therefore, the legal heirs are not intending to

¶29

Crl.R.P.No.1268/2012 2

¶30

prosecute the petitioner. The application evidencing the compromise has been brought on record. It would reveal that respondents 2 to 7 have volunteered to compound the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the revision petitioner. The said offence is compoundable under section 147 of the N.I. Act. In the said circumstances, the offence under section 138 of the N.I. Act for which the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced is compounded. Resultantly, the conviction and sentence passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur against the petitioner in C.C.No.1227 of 1995 which was modified in Crl.A.No.93 of 1998 are set aside. The petitioner is set at liberty. The bail bond, if any, will stand cancelled.

¶31

Sd/C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge

¶32

TKS

Balakrishnan v. Aboobacker

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balakrishnan v. Aboobacker

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

T.M. Jayachandran Vs Sri. K.G.Mohanlal

P.K.Chandran Vs K.G.Mohanlal

V.Surendran Vs Nancy Joseph

K.Jayendran Vs State of Kerala

Arjunan Vs State of Kerala

Kishor T.P Vs M/S Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd.