Allowed

Babu Mohan P.B. v. Baby Paul

Kerala HC7 Aug 2018CRL.A/101/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed this criminal appeal against an acquittal under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. The court remitted the matter for fresh evidence proceedings after finding that the appeal filed had resulted in a procedural disadvantage to the appellant.

What did the court decide?

The acquittal order dated 29.11.2005 was set aside and the matter was remanded to the court below for fresh evidence proceedings without prejudice to the defence.

Babu Mohan P.B. Vs Baby Paul — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 16TH SRAVANA, 1940

¶5

CC 1245/2002 of J.M.F.C.-II, KOCHI

¶6

APPELLANT(S)/COMPLAINANT

¶7

BABU MOHAN.P.B, SONS OF BHASKARAN, 11/1906, NARAYANI ILOM, RAMANKUTTY BHAGAVATHAR LANE, PANCHAYATH RAJ ROAD, PALLURUTHY.

¶8

BY ADV.SRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP

¶9

RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED AND STATE:

¶10

1. BABY PAUL, S/O.PAULOSE, KIZHAKKEKUDY HOUSE,, ORAKKALA KARA, KUMARAPRAM, KIZHAKKAMBALAM,, ALUVA.

¶11

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶12

HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶13

R1 BY ADV. SRI.SUNU P.JOHN

¶14

R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.E.C.BINEESH

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-08-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

STK

¶17

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

¶18

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

¶19

Crl. Appeal No.101 of 2006

¶20

Dated this the 7^th day of August, 2018

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The appellant is the complainant in

¶23

C.C.No.1245/2002 on the files of the court below. The

¶24

appellant filed a complaint against the first respondent herein before the court below alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short, 'the N.I.Act'). The court below acquitted the accused as per order dated 29.11.2005 under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C., against which this appeal has been filed after obtaining special leave from this Court.

¶25

Heard.

¶26

It is contented by the appellant that the case stood posted for evidence to 10.11.2005. However,

¶27

10.11.2005 was a holiday and hence the case was notified to 24.11.2005. However, there was an inadvertent

¶28

Crl. Appeal No.101 of 2006

¶29

-: 2 :-

¶30

mistake in noting down the date of posting of the case and in the said circumstances, the appellant had no representation before the court on 24.11.2005 as well as on 29.11.2005. It is contended that there was no willful negligence on the part of the appellant in this regard. Having gone through the relevant inputs, including the contention of the appellant, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to grant one more opportunity to the appellant to contest the matter on merits. For the said reason, I am inclined to set aside the order impugned. In the result, this appeal stands allowed, setting aside order dated 29.11.2005 in C.C.No.1245/2002 passed by the court below, acquitting the accused under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. and the court below is directed to proceed with C.C.No.1245/2002, in accordance with law. The proceedings of the court below shall stand relegated to the stage prior to the acquittal of the accused on 29.11.2005. The parties shall appear before the court

¶31

Crl. Appeal No.101 of 2006

¶32

-: 3 :-

¶33

below on 1.10.2018 without further notice.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE

¶36

STK

¶37

//TRUE COPY// //P.A. TO JUDGE//

Babu Mohan P.B. v. Baby Paul

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Mohan P.B. v. Baby Paul

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

Mathew John Vs Joseph Augustine

C.Suryanarayana Bhat Vs Purushothaman M.

Thoppil Chits Ltd. Vs K.Krishnakumar Prabhu

Kumar Vs Pushantha Kumar

Dai. K. Augustine Vs State of Kerala

B.Sainulabdeen Vs State of Kerala