Partly allowed

Fr.Lalumon.T.a. v. State of Kerala and Another

Kerala HC2 Aug 2012Crl.Rev.Pet/2953/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a revision on conviction and sentence under Section 138 NI Act, the court affirmed the conviction and imprisonment but granted 4 months from March 1, 2012 for the accused to pay the compensation, keeping execution in abeyance contingent upon appearance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to appear on 01.03.2012; sentence execution kept in abeyance for 4 months to enable payment of compensation.

Fr.Lalumon.T.a. Vs State of Kerala and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/29TH AGRAHAYANA 1933

¶5

CRRP.No. 2953 of 2011 ( ) ========================= CRA.NO.255/2010 OF SESSIONS COURT,THODUPUZHA ST.NO.310/2008 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -I, IDUKKI

¶6

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED

¶7

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

¶8

FR.LALUMON T.A., S/O.THOMAS, AGED 45 YEARS, KUTHIKALLUMKUNNEL HOUSE, CHEENTHALAR.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN

¶10

SRI.M.D.SASIKUMAR SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.DIPU JAMES SRI.K.P.UNNIKRISHNAN (ELOOR)

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE

¶12

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

¶13

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

¶14

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,

¶15

ERNAKULAM-31.

¶16

2. FEDERATE CHITS(INDIA) PRIVATE LTD.,

¶17

KATTAPPANA.PIN-685 508.

¶18

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SEENA.R.

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-12-2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

sts

¶21

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.

¶22

-----------------------------------------------

¶23

Crl.R.P.No.2953 of 2011

¶24

----------------------------------------------Dated this the 20^th day of December, 2011

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

Petitioner is the accused in a cheque case. His conviction for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 {for short ‘the Act’} as affirmed by the Sessions Judge turning down his appeal is assailed in this revision. Sentence imposed against the accused is imprisonment till the rising of the court with direction to pay the cheque amount as compensation with default term of simple imprisonment for one month.

¶27

The revision coming up for

¶28

consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submitted that he has no arguments to assail the conviction and also the sentence on its merits but only a request

¶29

Crl.R.P.No.2953 of 2011

¶30

:: 2 ::

¶31

to be made for grant of 4 months time to pay the compensation and thus, avoid the default term of imprisonment. Cheque involved in the case, which on dishonour gave rise to the prosecution of the accused and ultimately his conviction, is dated 14.08.2006 and the sum covered by that instrument is Rs.47,500/-. No part of the amount, despite an order directing compensation, has been paid so far. The time lag after the commencement of the prosecution with reference to the sum awarded as compensation, which is the cheque amount, that alone, prima facie, indicates that there is no merit in the request made for grant of further time for payment of the compensation. However, taking into consideration the submissions made by the counsel for the

¶32

Crl.R.P.No.2953 of 2011

¶33

:: 3 ::

¶34

petitioner that he is at present facing severe financial difficulties and unless a breathing time is given, he has no other go but to suffer the imprisonment, I find, a short period as indicated hereunder, can be provided for payment of the compensation.

¶35

Affirming the conviction and sentence petitioner is directed to appear before the magistrate on 01.03.2012, to serve out the imprisonment till the rising of the court and to report the payment of compensation. The magistrate shall keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence till the date fixed as above for his appearance, to enable him to pay the compensation within such period. In default of his appearance and non-payment of the compensation, the

¶36

Crl.R.P.No.2953 of 2011

¶37

:: 4 ::

¶38

magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law.

¶39

Revision is disposed of as above.

¶40

Sd/(S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN) JUDGE

¶41

sk/-

¶42

//true copy//

¶43

P.S. to Judge.

Fr.Lalumon.T.a. v. State of Kerala and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fr.Lalumon.T.a. v. State of Kerala and Another

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

P.N.Sourabhan Vs State of Kerala

Liju Vs State of Kerala

Kumudini Vs State of Kerala

Mini Shanmughan Vs Shanmughan

P.M.Salahudheen Naina Vs State of Kerala

Sajan.K.Varghese Vs C.L.Dileep