Disposed

R.Harikumar v. M.Madhusoodanan Nair

Kerala HC8 Jun 2017Crl.Rev.Pet/653/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision petition regarding conviction under Section 138 NI Act, the High Court confirmed conviction and sentence. It granted three months time to pay compensation of Rs. 1 lakh, waiving interest if paid in full by the deadline; otherwise, original interest and imprisonment defaults apply.

What did the court decide?

Grant of time to pay compensation and waiver of interest if paid by 31.08.2017; confirmation of conviction and sentence with conditions pending payment.

R.Harikumar Vs M.Madhusoodanan Nair — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/18TH JYAISHTA, 1939

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 653 of 2017 ()

¶6

CRL.A 826/2010 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT-I, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ST 330/2006 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-VIII, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ ACCUSED:

¶8

R.HARIKUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS, RISHNA BHAVAN, T.C. 17/962, CHATTAMBISWAMY ROAD, POOJAPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.BIJU ABRAHAM SRI.J.G.SYAMNATH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶11

1. M.MADHUSOODANAN NAIR, MADHAVAM, KURUNTHANKUDI, PARASSALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31.

¶13

R1 BY SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER (SENIOR ADVOCATE) ADV. SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

mbr/

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

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

Crl.R.P.No. 653 of 2017

¶19

================== Dated this the 8^th day of June, 2017 O R D E R

¶20

The petitioner herein is the accused in Summary Trial Case, S.T.No. 330/2006 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-VIII, Thiruvananthapuram, for offence punishable under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, instituted on the basis of the complaint filed by the 1^st respondent (complainant). The trial court as per the impugned judgment dated 18.10.2010 had convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- along with interest thereon @ 8% p.a. from 30.3.2004 (date of Ext.P-1 dishonoured cheque) till realisation, 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. 826/2010 before the appellate Sessions Court concerned (Court of Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Thiruvananthapuram). The appellate court as per the impugned appellate judgment dated 13.10.2016 had upheld the conviction and sentence and thereby dismissed the appeal. It is aggrieved by the said concurrent findings and conviction by the courts below that

¶21

the petitioner has preferred the instant revision petition by taking recourse to the remedies available under Sec.397 read with Sec.401 of the Cr.P.C.

¶22

Crl.R.P.653/17 - : 2 :-

¶23

Heard Sri.Biju Abraham, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner (accused), Sri.M.Ramesh Chander, learned Senior Counsel, instructed by Smt.K.A.Sanjeetha, learned counsel appearing for R-1 (complainant) and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Prosecutor appearing for R-2 State.

¶24

Sri.Biju Abraham, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner (accused) submits on the basis of the instructions of his party that the petitioner is not challenging the legality and correctness of the impugned conviction and sentence in relation to this case and would only pray for a direction from this Court to grant at least 3 months' time to pay the compensation amount of Rs.1 lakh directly to the complainant and further that the interest ordered by the courts below on the abovesaid compensation amount may be waived. Sri.M.Ramesh Chander, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant submits that the complainant does not have objection for grant of time by a further period not exceeding 3 months and further that the interest portion may not be waived. The petitioner's counsel would point out that the petitioner is in deep financial difficulties and if the interest is also upheld to be given from 30.4.2004 as ordered by the trial court, he will not be able to pay the money within such a short time and that this Court may exercise its discretionary revisionary powers so as to waive interest. In the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is inclined to grant time till 31.8.2017 and would also waive the interest amount, provided

¶25

Crl.R.P.653/17 - : 3 :-

¶26

the petitioner pays the entire compensation amount of Rs.1 lakh directly to the complainant on or before 31.8.2017. It is made clear that in the event of the petitioner not paying the aforesaid compensation amount in its entirety on or before 31.8.2017, then the said compensation amount will carry interest @ 8% p.a. from 30.3.2004 till the date of actual realisation as ordered by the trial court. Accordingly, the following orders and directions are issued:

¶27

(i) The impugned conviction imposed on the petitioner for the offence under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act will stand confirmed.

¶28

(ii) The substantive sentence of imprisonment till rising of the court and the order to pay compensation amount of Rs.1 lakh (which is the cheque amount) is also confirmed.

¶29

(iii) The petitioner is given time till 31.8.2017 to pay the entire compensation amount as Rs.1 lakh directly to the complainant and upon receiving such amount, the complainant will issue receipts to the accused so that the accused can produce the same before the trial court to satisfy the court about payment of the said amount.

¶30

(iv) In the event that the petitioner does not pay the full amount of Rs.1 lakh as directed herein above before 31.8.2017, then the petitioner will be liable to pay interest @ 8% p.a. from 30.3.2004 till the date of actual realisatoin.

¶31

(v) The petitioner shall personally appear before the trial court at 11 a.m. on 31.8.2017 to receive the sentence of imprisonment till rising of the court and to satisfy the trial court about the payment of the full amount of Rs.1 lakh as on that day.

¶32

(vi) On default of the petitioner to pay the abovesaid amount, he will have to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of 2 months.

¶33

(vii) Until 31.8.2017 all further coercive steps taken against the petitioner in pursuance of the execution of the impugned sentence will stand deferred.

¶34

(viii) On default of the petitioner either to appear before the trial court on 31.8.2017 or in paying the abovesaid amount, the trial court will be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner, in accordance with law.

¶35

With these observations and directions, the aforecaptioned Crl.R.P.

¶36

stands finally disposed of.

¶37

sdk+

¶38

Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

¶39

///True Copy///

¶40

P.S. to Judge

¶41

Crl.R.P.653/17 - : 4 :-

R.Harikumar v. M.Madhusoodanan Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Harikumar v. M.Madhusoodanan Nair

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

Sreekala Vs State of Kerala

Samuel George Vs State of Kerala

Hari @ Harikuttan Vs State of Kerala

Chelladurai Vs Sureshkumar (Biju)

M.U.Abdul Salam Vs M.P.Moosa

Anil Kumar Vs Secretary, Collection Agents Welfare Co-Operative Society