Dismissed

M.S.Muthukumara Swamy v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Oct 2012Crl.Rev.Pet/1910/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Revision Petition pertains to a cheque-bounce prosecution where the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment and fine. Having settled for time to pay, the High Court disposed of the revision by granting additional time to pay the fine.

What did the court decide?

Execution of the sentence kept in abeyance for four months; petitioner to appear on 11.2.2013 after paying fine.

M.S.Muthukumara Swamy Vs the State of Kerala — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/16TH ASWINA 1934

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1910 of 2012 (C)

¶6

IN CRA.653/2011 of DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT,TRIVANDRUM IN CC.1017/2005 of J.M.F.C.-I,ATTINGAL

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

¶8

M.S.MUTHUKUMARA SWAMY SIDHA DOCTOR, NEW NO.2, BHARATH NAGAR 3RD STREET, 2ND FLOOR, SANTHIVILLA CHENNAI, T.NAGAR.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN

¶10

SMT.V.RENJU SRI.P.ANIYAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT

¶12

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

¶13

2. DR.SHEERAPANI S/O.BALAN, SWAMI BHAVAN, VALIYAKADA CHIRAYILKEEZHU DESOM, SARKARA VILLAGE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER JANARDHANAN PILLAI S/O.ARUMUGHAM PILLAI, NEDUVELI VEEDU CHIRAYINKEEZHU DESOM (CHIRAYINKEEZHE VILLAGE) PIN-695 304.

¶14

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SEENA RAMAKRISHNAN

¶15

R2 BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

kvr/

S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

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

Crl.R.P.No. 1910 of 2012

¶21

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

¶22

Dated this the 8^th day of October, 2012 O R D E R

¶23

The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.1017/2005 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Attingal. The prosecution was one under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Magistrate convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of ` 5,00,000/- with a default sentence of three months' simple imprisonment. The compensation was directed to be paid to the 2^nd respondent under Section 357 (1) of the Cr.P.C. In appeal, the Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram confirmed the conviction. But the sentence was modified to one till rising of the court maintaining the fine amount as ordered by the court below. Those judgments are under challenge in this Criminal Revision Petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner now submits that the petitioner only wants time to pay the compensation amount.

¶24

Having considered the matter, I am inclined to grant the petitioner four months' time to pay the fine amount. Accordingly,

¶25

Crl.R.P.1910/12 - : 2 :-

¶26

this Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Magistrate to keep the execution of the sentence in abeyance for a period of four months. The petitioner shall appear before the Magistrate after paying the fine amount for undergoing the sentence of imprisonment on 11.2.2013. The amounts already paid by the petitioner shall be given due credit for.

¶27

sdk+

¶28

Sd/S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

¶29

///True copy///

¶30

P.A. to Judge

M.S.Muthukumara Swamy v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.S.Muthukumara Swamy v. the 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

T.P Shajith Vs N.K.Ramachandran

V.Balan Vs N.N.Kunhikrishnan Namboothiri

Sandeep Kumar v. Vs Akhil Muralildharan

Basheer Vs State of Kerala

Pushparajan Vs State of Kerala

Seetha @ Sathyan Vs Vasantha Kumari