Partly allowed

Jalaja v. a.Balachandran

Kerala HC19 Jun 2017Crl.Rev.Pet/261/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, in a criminal revision regarding a conviction under Sec.138 NI Act, modified the punishment following a post-trial mediation settlement. The court maintained conviction but substituted the sentence with a fine of Rs.4 lakhs on deferred payment terms.

What did the court decide?

Conviction maintained; sentence modified to fine of Rs.4 lakhs payable within 6 months; coercive measures deferred.

Jalaja Vs a.Balachandran — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/29TH JYAISHTA, 1939

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 261 of 2017 (C)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRA. 487/2012 OF ADDL.SESSIONS COURT-II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶7

ST. 2013/2009 OF J.M.F.C.-I, NEYYATTINKARA

¶8

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

¶9

JALAJA,

¶10

W/O.VARGHESE, AGED 50, KOCHANAVILA VEEDU, THIRUPURAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR

¶12

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶13

1. A.BALACHANDRAN, S/O.APPU PILLAI, B.J.BHAVAN, THOPPUVILA, ATHIYANNORE VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA.

¶14

2. STATE OF KERALA,

¶15

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶16

R1 BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV

¶17

SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN

¶18

SRI.D.FEROZE

¶19

SRI.V.VINAY

¶20

R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

SKG

¶23

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶24

Crl.R.P.No.261 Of 2017

¶25

Dated this the 19th day of June, 2017.

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

The petitioner is the accused for the offence under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in S.T.No.2013/2009 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara, instituted on the basis of a complaint filed by R-1 herein. The trial court as per the impugned judgment rendered on 28.9.2012 had convicted the petitioner for the above said offence and sentenced her to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay compensation of Rs.11,73,880/- to the complainant under Sec.357(3) of the Cr.P.C., and in default thereof the accused was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of three months. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has preferred Crl.A.No.487/2012 before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The appellate court concerned [Court of Additional Sessions Judge II, Thiruvananthapuram], as per the impugned judgment dated 1.6.2015 had upheld the conviction and sentence and thereby dismissed the appeal. It is aggrieved by these

¶28

::2::

¶29

Crl.R.P.No.261 Of 2017, etc.

¶30

verdicts, that the petitioner has preferred the instant Crl.R.P by taking recourse to the remedy under Sec.397 r/w Sec.401 of the Cr.P.C.

¶31

Heard Sri.M.Sreekumar, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner-accused, Sri.S.Rajeev, learned counsel appearing for R-1 (complainant) and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Prosecutor appearing for R-2 State.

¶32

The matter has been settled through mediation and a copy of the memorandum of mediation agreement has also been made available for perusal, which reads as follows:

¶33

“MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT UNDER RULES 24 & 25 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE (ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION). RULES 2008:

¶34

The parties to the above matter being the petitioner and the respondent alone, state being only a formal party, they on facilitation in mediation and in consultation with their respective counsel has agreed to settle their dispute in the above case on the following terms and conditions:

¶35

It is agreed by the petitioner Jalaja that she will pay an amount of Rs. 4 lakhs within a period of 6 months from today to the respondent Balachandran in full and final settlement of the compensation ordered in S.T.2013/ 2009 and confirmed in Cri.A.No.487/2012 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court 1, Neyyattinkara, and 2'nd Addl. Sessions court, Thiruvananthapuram respectively .The Respondent agrees to receive the same on the said terms and conditions.

¶36

It is also agreed by the petitioner Jalaja that due to her financial constraints, the 6 months period is allowed by respondent to realize the payment. Hence on default of payment of the amount as per Clause (1) of this agreement, the respondent will be at liberty to realize the full amount of Rs 9 lakhs which is the cheque amount.

¶37

On realization of the amount as per clause(1) the parties agree to file necessary compounding petition as envisaged by law.

¶38

::3::

¶39

Crl.R.P.No.261 Of 2017, etc.

¶40

Hence it is humbly prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to incorporate this settlement agreement as part of this Honourable Court's Judgment and dispose of the above Revision Petition in the interest of justice.

¶41

Dated this the 31st day of May 2017

¶42

Petitioner Respondent sd/sd/Jalaja A.Balachandran sd/sd/Counsel for the petitioner Counsel for the Respondent”

¶43

Accordingly, this Court is of the view that in the light of the

¶44

mediation agreement the sentence may be modified by ordering that the petitioner is sentenced to pay fine of Rs.4 lakhs with default clause of 2

¶45

months' simple imprisonment. Accordingly, the following orders and directions are passed:

¶46

(i) The impugned conviction imposed on the petitioner by the courts below is maintained.

¶47

(ii) In supersession of the orders passed by the courts below it is ordered that the petitioner is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.4 lakhs.

¶48

(iii) The petitioner is given 6 months' time from 1.7.2017 to pay the said amount of Rs.4 lakhs directly to the complainant. On receipt of such amount the 1st respondent-complainant will ensure that necessary receipts are issued to evidence payment of such amounts by the accused. Any such payments so made by the petitioner directly to the complainant will be treated as if those amounts are paid as fine and then disbursed to the complainant as

¶49

::4::

¶50

Crl.R.P.No.261 Of 2017, etc.

¶51

compensation under Sec.357(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C.

¶52

(iv) The petitioner will appear before the trial court at 11:00 a.m. on 6.1.2018 to satisfy the trial court about the payment of fine amount of Rs.4 lakhs to the complainant and in default thereof he will have to suffer simple imprisonment of 2 months .

¶53

(v) Until 6.1.2018 all coercive steps taken against the petitioner-accused in execution of the impugned sentence will stand deferred.

¶54

(vi) Needless to say, on default of the petitioner either to appear before the court below on 6.1.2018 or to make the payment, the trial court will be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶55

With these observations and directions, the Crl.R.P. stands finally

disposed of.

ALEXANDER THOMAS,

Judge.

bkn/-

Jalaja v. a.Balachandran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jalaja v. a.Balachandran

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

A . Shaul Hameed Vs State of Kerala

Sajitha Vs Shree Thiruvangad Chits Pvt. Ltd.

P.V. Abraham Vs State of Kerala

Rekha N.R Vs Smt.Usha Titus

A.P.Kumaran Vs State of Kerala

Girish Kumar, S/O.Gopalan Vs Suresan