Allowed

Thoppil Chits Ltd. v. K.Krishnakumar Prabhu

Kerala HC6 Aug 2018CRL.A/1635/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal by a cheque-complainant against an acquittal order was allowed. The Court, acknowledging the appellant's delay in appearance due to a vehicle breakdown, deemed it just to grant another opportunity to contest the matter on merits, setting aside the acquittal and remanding the case for disposal prior to the acquittal stage.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is allowed. The order dated 7-3-2007 acquitting the accused is set aside. The trial court is directed to dispose of C.C. No. 960 of 2004 as if proceedings were prior to the acquittal. The c

Thoppil Chits Ltd. Vs K.Krishnakumar Prabhu — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 15TH SRAVANA, 1940

¶5

CRL.A.No. 1635 of 2007

¶6

CC 960/2004 of ADDL.C.J.M.(E&O),ERNAKULAM Crl.L.P. 474/2007 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 11-07-2007

¶7

APPELLANT(S)/COMPLAINANT

¶8

THOPPIL CHITS (P) LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE AT THOPPIL TOWERS,, KALOOR-KATHRUKADAVU ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI-17,, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR T.V.THOMAS.

¶9

ADV. SMT. M.M. JASMINE

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED:

¶11

K.KRISHNAKUMAR PRABHU,

¶12

S/O.RAMANANDA PRABU, 40/3291,, SREE KRISHNA, T.D. WEST ROAD, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.T.GANGADHARA BHAT

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-08-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

¶16

Crl.Appeal No. 1635 of 2007

¶17

Dated this the 6^th day of August, 2018

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The appellant is the complainant in C.C. No.960 of 2004 on the files of the court below. The appellant filed a complaint against the first respondent herein before the court below, alleging offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. The court below, on 7-3-2007 acquitted the accused under Section 256 (1) Cr.P.C., against which this appeal has been filed after obtaining special leave from this Court.

¶20

Heard.

¶21

It has been contended by the appellant that the vehicle in which the appellant and the counsel were travelling had a breakdown and hence they had to proceed to the court in an autorickshaw. Therefore, the appellant and his counsel could reach the court late. By the time, they reached the court, the case was called and the accused was acquitted. It has been submitted by the learned counsel

¶22

-2-

¶23

Crl.Appeal No. 1635 of 2007

¶24

for the appellant that there was no willful lapse on the part of the appellant in this regard.

¶25

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the contention of the appellant, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to give 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.

¶26

In the result, this appeal stands allowed, setting aside order dated 7-3-2007 passed by the court below in C.C. No. 960 of 2004 and the court below is directed to dispose of C.C. No. 960 of 2004, in accordance with law. The proceedings of the court below shall stand relegated to the stage prior to the acquittal of the accused on 7-32007. The appellant shall appear before the court below on 14-09-2018 without further notice.

¶27

Sd/- B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE .

¶28

ani/7/8

Thoppil Chits Ltd. v. K.Krishnakumar Prabhu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thoppil Chits Ltd. v. K.Krishnakumar Prabhu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.F.S.Chits & Loans (P) Ltd. Vs Raghu Prabhakaran

C. Khadeeja Vs T.K. Premachandran

Jayakumar Vs State

Mathew John Vs Joseph Augustine

C.Suryanarayana Bhat Vs Purushothaman M.

Kristal Infrastructure Ltd. Vs State of Kerala