The High Court disposed of a criminal revision petition filed by an accused convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court confirmed the conviction but granted a six-month extension to pay compensation.
Conviction confirmed; petitioner granted 6 months time to pay Rs. 1 lakh compensation to complainant.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/16TH JYAISHTA, 1939
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 43 of 2017 ()
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRL.A. NO.361/2012 OF I ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM DATED 28-02-2014. AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ST. NO.1117/2007 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, SASTHAMCOTTA DATED 22-11-2012.
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
N. SASIDHARAN, VILAYILKIZHAKKATHIL, KALLELIBHAGAM P.O., KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SMT.G.VIDYA.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2. K.G. AJITH KUMAR, KANJIRAMVILAYIL VEEDU, EDAKKADU MURI, PORUVAZHY VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-690 520.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JESTIN MATHEW.
R2 BY ADVS. SRI.P.PREJITH, SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
==================
Crl.R.P.No.43 of 2017
==================
Dated this the 6th day of June, 2017 O R D E R
The petitioner herein is the accused in Summary Trial Case, S.T.No. 1117/2007 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Sasthamcotta, for offence punishable under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, instituted on the basis of the complaint filed by the 2nd respondent (complainant). The trial court as per the impugned judgment dated 22.11.2012 had convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant as compensation, in default of payment of which, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of 3 months. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner had preferred Crl.Appeal No.361/2012 before the appellate Sessions Court concerned (Court of I Addl. Sessions Judge, Kollam). The appellate court as per the impugned appellate judgment dated 28.2.2014 had upheld the conviction, but modified the substantive sentence of 3 months' simple imprisonment to imprisonment till rising of the court, etc. It is aggrieved by the said findings and conviction of the courts below that the petitioner has preferred the instant revision petition by taking recourse to the
Crl.M.C.43/2017 - : 2 :-
remedies available under Sec.397 read with Sec.401 of the Cr.P.C.
Crl.M.C.43/2017 - : 3 :-
personally appear before the trial court at 11 a.m. on 16.12.2017 to receive the sentence of imprisonment till rising of the court and to remit the compensation amount after deducting any amount that might have already been deposited by the petitioner in this case. On default of payment of the said amount as directed above, the petitioner will have to undergo to simple imprisonment for three months as ordered by the court below. Until 16.12.2017, all further coercive steps taken against the petitioner in pursuance of the execution of the impugned sentence in this case will stand deferred.
With these observations and directions, the aforecaptioned Criminal Revision Petition stands finally disposed of.
sdk+
Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
///True Copy///
P.S. to Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to an extension of time for payment of compensation without challenging the conviction.
N. Sasidharan
State of Kerala
K.G. Ajith Kumar
Alexander Thomas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
