Allowed

Dr.v.S.Sudhakaran Nair v. P.Vijayan

Kerala HC21 Jun 2012Crl.Rev.Pet/1342/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the conviction and sentence against the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act following a verified compromise and voluntary compounding of the offence by the complainant in terms of Section 147.

What did the court decide?

The conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were set aside; the bail bond was cancelled.

Dr.v.S.Sudhakaran Nair Vs P.Vijayan — 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

THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE 2012/31ST JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1342 of 2012 () ------------------------------(AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.6.06 IN CRA.37/2005 of ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC), THODUPUZHA IN CC.190/2003 DATED 13.1.2005 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT , DEVIKULAM)

¶6

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

¶7

DR.V.S.SUDHAKARAN NAIR

¶8

SUMATHI NIVAS, SARKARA.P.O., CHIRAYINKEEZHU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL

¶10

SRI.K.NIRMALAN

¶11

COMPLAINANT(S)/COMPLAINANT :

¶12

P.VIJAYAN S/O. PADMANABHAN, ANITHA BHAVAN, MARAYOOR IDUKKI.

¶13

STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM.

¶14

R1 BY ADV.SRI.JACOB CHACKO

¶15

R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.NOUSHAD THOTTATHIL

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: al.

¶17

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

¶18

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

¶19

C RL. R.P. NO. 1342 of 2012

¶20

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

¶21

Dated this the 21^st day of June 2012

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The revision petitioner was the accused in C.C.No. 190/2003 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Devikulam. There is concurrent verdict of conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the revision petitioner. However, the appellate court modified the sentence imposed by the trial court. The amount of compensation directed to be paid was reduced to Rs. 75,000/- while retaining the default sentence imposed. This revision petition has been filed in the said circumstances.

¶24

Subsequent to the conviction and sentence recorded

¶25

by the courts below, the parties have compromised the case, that led

¶26

to the conviction and sentence of the revision petitioner and the compromise has been duly verified and brought on record by filing

¶27

C RL. R.P. NO. 1342 of 2012 # 2#

¶28

Crl. M.A. No. 4586 of 2012. A perusal of the said petition would reveal that the respondent has volunteered to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the revision petitioner.

¶29

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶30

and also the learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent.

¶31

In terms of the provisions under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable. As noted earlier, the 1^st respondent has already volunteered to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act against the revision petitioner.

¶32

In the said circumstances, while the compounding of

¶33

the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,

¶34

C RL. R.P. NO. 1342 of 2012 # 3#

¶35

the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioner herein in C.C.No. 190/2003 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Devikulam which were confirmed in the judged dated 29-6-2006 in Criminal Appeal No. 37/2005 on the court of the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-I), Thodupuzha, are set aside. The bail bond, if any, will stand cancelled.

¶36

Sd/C.T. RAVIKUMAR JUDGE

¶37

kvr/

¶38

/True Copy/

¶39

P.A. to Judge

Dr.v.S.Sudhakaran Nair v. P.Vijayan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.v.S.Sudhakaran Nair v. P.Vijayan

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

K.Balakrishnan Vs K.G.Mohanlal

K.P.Ramachandran Nair Vs Sri.K.G.Mohan Lal

Sanoop Prasad Vs Dr.S.Soumya

P.a.Simon Vs Mohanlal

C.K. Vijayan Vs K.G.Mohanlal

P.M.Sumesh Vs State of Kerala