Partly allowed

V.Balan v. N.N.Kunhikrishnan Namboothiri

Kerala HC5 Oct 2012Crl.Rev.Pet/1679/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hearing revision petition against conviction and sentence in a cheque dishonour case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court allowed the partial relief sought by the petitioner regarding compensation payment while maintaining the conviction.

What did the court decide?

Conviction confirmed; sentence modified to till rising of Court; compensation increased to Rs.70,000 to be paid within 3 months; sentence execution stayed until payment.

V.Balan Vs N.N.Kunhikrishnan Namboothiri — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. SIRI JAGAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/13TH ASWINA 1934 Crl. Rev. Pet. No. 1679 of 2012 ()

¶5

CRA NO.98/2006 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, THALASSERY ST NO.23/2005 of J.M.F.C.,PAYYANNUR

¶6

REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

¶7

V. BALAN S/O. LATE NARAYANA KURUP, AGED 48 YEARS CHEMBRAKANAM P.O. THIMIRI, KAYOOR VILLAGE KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI. S.U. NAZAR SRI. MANSOOR. B.H.

¶9

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶10

1. N.N. KUNHIKRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI

¶11

AGED 32 YEARS

¶12

S/O. NEELAMANA ILLATHU NARASIMHAN NAMBOODIRI

¶13

KARIVELLUR AMSOM, NIDUVAPURAM DESOM

¶14

THALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670135.

¶15

2. STATE OF KERALA

¶16

REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶17

ERNAKULAM.

¶18

R1 BY ADVS. SRI. ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL

¶19

SRI. P.S. BINU

¶20

R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.T SHEEBA

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

SIRI JAGAN, J. --------------------------------------Crl. R.P. No:1679/2012

¶24

Dated this the 5^th day of October, 2012.

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

The petitioner is challenging the judgments of the Judicial First Class Magistrate (Munsiff), Payyannur and that of the Court of Sessions, Thalassery in S.T.C. No.23/2005 and Crl. Appeal No.98/2006 respectively, in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Magistrate convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a compensation of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty thousand only) to the complainant within 6 months, in default of which the petitioner was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of 6 months. The Sessions Judge, while confirming the conviction, reduced the sentence of imprisonment to 3 months, but confirmed the direction to pay compensation of Rs.60,000/-, with a default sentence of one month's imprisonment. When the matter was taken up today, the counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has already deposited Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty five thousand only) pursuant to the interim order of this Court dated 26.07.2012. He

¶27

Crl. R.P. No:1679/2012

¶28

¶29

submits that, he does not wish to contest the matter on merits but confines relief for 3 months time to pay the balance compensation amount. He prays that, the substantive sentence of imprisonment may be reduced. He agrees to pay some more compensation to the 1^st respondent. I have heard the counsel for the 1^st respondent also.

¶30

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Crl. Revision Petition is disposed of as follows:

¶31

The conviction of the petitioner is confirmed. The sentence of imprisonment is modified into one of imprisonment till the rising of the Court. The compensation amount is increased to Rs.70,000/(Rupees Seventy thousand only). The said compensation amount, after deducting the amount already deposited by the petitioner, pursuant to the interim order, shall be paid within 3 months. The petitioner shall appear before the Magistrate to undergo the sentence of imprisonment on 07.01.2013 after paying the compensation amount as directed. Till then the Magistrate shall keep the execution of the sentence in abeyance.

¶32

S. SIRI JAGAN

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

V.Balan v. N.N.Kunhikrishnan Namboothiri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Balan v. N.N.Kunhikrishnan Namboothiri

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

Smt.P.J.Ramanikutty Vs Sri.Ashok Kumar Singh

Balakrishna Pillai Vs State

Madalan Subair Vs State of Kerala

T.P Shajith Vs N.K.Ramachandran

Sandeep Kumar v. Vs Akhil Muralildharan

Mohanachandran Nair Vs Rakesh