Allowed

Sandeep Kumar v. Vs Akhil Muralildharan

Kerala HC5 Oct 2012Crl.Rev.Pet/2079/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a criminal revision petition challenging conviction and sentence under Section 138 NI Act. The court confirmed the conviction, granted two months to pay compensation, and directed enforcement of the default sentence upon expiry.

What did the court decide?

The conviction and sentence are confirmed; the petitioner is granted two months' time to pay the compensation amount.

Sandeep Kumar v. Vs Akhil Muralildharan — 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

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2079 of 2012 ()

¶6

CRA.113/2011 OF ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-I), ERNAKULAM CC.575/2009 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KOCHI

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED :

¶8

SANDEEP KUMAR V., S/O.VENUGOPAL, KRISHNALAYAM, CHERTHALA SOUTH, ALAPPUZHA.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI. V.T. RAGHUNATH SMT. C.V. RAJALAKSHMI

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT :

¶11

1. AKHIL MURALILDHARAN

¶12

S/O.MURALISHARAN, 10/165, AMARAVATHY

¶13

KOCHI-682 001.

¶14

2. STATE OF KERALA

¶15

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶17

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR

¶18

SRI.BENNY M. JOHN R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.T. SHEEBA

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

S. SIRI JAGAN, J.

¶22

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl. Rev. Petition No.2079 of 2012

¶23

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

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

The petitioner is the accused in C.C. No.575/2009 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Kochi, in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Magistrate convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.1 lakh with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. The fine amount, if realised, was directed to be paid to the complainant under Section 357 (1) (b) of the Cr.P.C. The petitioner filed Crl. Appeal No.113/2011 before the Additional Sessions Judge, (Ad Hoc-I), Ernakulam, who confirmed the conviction but reduced the substantive punishment of imprisonment to one till rising of the court but increased the fine to Rs.1,05,000/- with a default sentence of imprisonment for one month. The judgments of the courts below are under challenge in this Crl. R.P. When

¶26

Crl. Rev. Petition No.2079 of 2012

¶27

-2-

¶28

the matter was taken up, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not wish to contest on merits but confines relief for time to pay the compensation amount.

¶29

I have heard the counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent also.

¶30

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this Crl.R.P. as follows:

¶31

The conviction and sentence are confirmed. The petitioner is given two months' time from today to pay the compensation amount. If the petitioner does not pay the compensation amount within the said time, the Magistrate's Court shall enforce the default sentence by issuing appropriate distress warrant. The petitioner shall appear before the Magistrate to undergo the punishment of imprisonment on 7.12.2012, after paying the compensation amount. Till then, the Magistrate shall keep the execution of the sentence in abeyance.

¶32

Sd///True copy// S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE

¶33

shg/ P.A. TO JUDGE

Sandeep Kumar v. Vs Akhil Muralildharan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar v. Vs Akhil Muralildharan

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

V.Balan Vs N.N.Kunhikrishnan Namboothiri

Mohanachandran Nair Vs Rakesh