Allowed

Asokan v. a.N.Krishnan

Kerala HC18 Jun 2012Crl.Rev.Pet/1297/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition against a conviction under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was disposed of by setting aside the conviction and sentence after the appellant and complainant filed a maintenance application stating the dispute was settled and the complainant received payment, leading to the compounding of the offence.

What did the court decide?

The conviction and sentence against the revision petitioner were set aside, the offence was compounded, the bail bond was cancelled, and the revision petition was disposed of.

Asokan Vs a.N.Krishnan — 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

MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/28ND JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1297 of 2012 () ------------------------------CRA.734/2008 of ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE(MARADU CASES)KOZHIKODE CC.670/2006 of J.M.F.C.,KOYILANDY

¶6

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED.:

¶7

ASOKAN

¶8

S/O.SANKARAN, AGED 44 YEARS, PANDAYADATHUKARA HOUSE NAMBRATHUKARA, NADUVATHUR P.O., KOYILANDI KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.B.V.JOY SANKER SRI.JACOB CHACKO BIJI MATHEW

¶10

COMPLAINANT(S):

¶11

A.N.KRISHNAN INDIRA BHAVAN, NAMBRATHUKARA, NADUVATHUR P.O. KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673614.

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.BIJU MINATTOOR-R2

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶16

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

¶17

CRL.R.P. No.1297 OF 2012

¶18

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

¶19

Dated this the 18^th day of June, 2012

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The accused in C.C.No.670 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Koyilandy is the revision petitioner. This revision petition is directed against the judgment of the Court of Special Additional Sessions Judge (Marad Cases), Kozhikode in Crl.A.No.774 of 2008 confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Koyilandy in C.C.No.670 of 2006. The revision petitioner stands convicted under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. An amount of Rs.50,000/- was also awarded as compensation under section 357(3) Cr.P.C with a default sentence of imprisonment for one month.

¶22

Obviously, it is the failure on the part of the revision

¶23

petitioner to discharge the liability towards the first respondent despite the receipt of the statutory notice and the expiry of the statutorily prescribed period that led to the conviction and sentence of

¶24

¶25

Crl.R.P.1297/12

¶26

the petitioner. Now, Crl.M.A.No.4398 of 2012 has been jointly filed by the revision petitioner and the first respondent-complainant stating that the dispute involved in this case has been settled and the first respondent-complainant has received the amount to his full satisfaction and as such, the offence may be permitted to be compounded. The offence alleged against the revision petitioner under section 138 of the N.I. Act is compoundable in terms of section 147 of the N.I.Act.

¶27

In the above circumstances, the offence under section 138 of

¶28

the N.I. Act against the revision petitioner is compounded. Resultantly, the conviction and sentence passed against revision petitioner by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Koyilandy in C.C.No.670 of 2006 under section 138 of the N.I.Act and confirmed by the judgment in Crl.A.No.734 of 2008 of the Court of Special Additional Sessions Judge (Marad Cases), Kozhikode are set aside. The bail bond, if any, will stand cancelled.

¶29

This revision petition is disposed of, accordingly.

¶30

C.T. RAVIKUMAR (Judge)

spc/

Crl.R.P.1297/12

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

September, 2010

¶37

Crl.R.P.1297/12 4

Asokan v. a.N.Krishnan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asokan v. a.N.Krishnan

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

C.v.Ramachandra Kurup Vs K.G.Mohanlal

Mohandas C.NO.109 Vs Jayanthi

Sujimon Antony @ Suji Vs Jaya @ Mary Jacquilin

K.Ravindran Nair Vs K.Gopalakrishna Bhat and Another

M/S.Kishco Ltd,Mumbai Vs K.a.Vincent @ Wiilson Alex

Renuka Suku Vs Shinu Stephen