Allowed

T.K. Basheer & Co. v. Lal Tech Enterprises (P) Ltd.

Kerala HC24 Sept 2018CRL.A/47/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the criminal appeal against the acquittal of an accused under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. The court set aside the acquittal, granted the appellant a fresh opportunity to contest the matter, and remanded the proceedings to the court below to continue prior to previous acquittal.

What did the court decide?

The acquittal order dated 16-11-2017 is set aside. The lower court is directed to proceed with the trial and parties to appear on 22-10-2018.

T.K. Basheer & Co. Vs Lal Tech Enterprises (P) Ltd. — 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 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 2ND ASWINA, 1940

¶5

CRL.A.No. 47 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRL.L.P. 520/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 14-12-2017

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ST 63/2017 of J.F.C.M.COURTII, TIRUR DATED 16-11-2017

¶8

APPELLANT/S:

¶9

T.K. BASHEER & CO

¶10

A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER T.K MOHAMMED BASHEER, S/O. MOHAMMEDKUTTY KURIKKAL,AGED 48 YEARS, THAYYIL KIZHAKKAYIL HOUSE, TIRUR TALUK,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADVS.

¶12

SRI.K.P.SUDHEER SRI.ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN

¶13

RESPONDENT/S:

¶14

1 LAL TECH ENTERPRISES (P) LTD A COMPANY HAVING OFFICE AT CHAKOLAS PALACE,NORTH KALAMASSERY, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR ABDUL JALAL,S/O. P.K. KHADER, PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, PALLARIMANGALAM P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 686 671.

¶15

2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

SRI.E. C. BINEESH-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CRL.A.No. 47 of 2018

-2-

JUDGMENT

The appellant is the complainant in S.T. No. 63 of 2017 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 Negotiable Instruments Act (“the N.I.Act” for short). The court below, on 16-11-2017, acquitted the accused under Section 256 (1) Cr.P.C. stating that the complainant was not present before the court on that date, against which this appeal has been filed after obtaining Special Leave from this Court.

¶24

Heard.

¶25

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that since the appellant was laid up due to back pain,

¶26

the appellant could not be present before the court below on 16-

¶27

CRL.A.No. 47 of 2018

¶28

-3-

¶29

11-2017 when the case was called. However, CMP No. 437 of

¶30

2017 was filed praying for condoning the absence of the complainant. However, the court below dismissed the said application and acquitted the accused.

¶31

It appears that the appellant had filed Annexure-

¶32

A2 application praying for condoning the absence of the appellant before the court below on 16-11-2017. The court below did not state any reason as to why the case could not have been adjourned to some other date when the complainant was not

¶33

present before the court on that date in person. Having gone through the relevant inputs, 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.

¶34

In the result, this appeal stands allowed, setting aside order

¶35

CRL.A.No. 47 of 2018

¶36

dated 16-11-2017 passed by the court below acquitting the accused under Section 256 (1) Cr.P.C. and the court below is directed to proceed with S.T. 63 of 2017 in accordance with law, The proceedings of the court below shall stand relegated to the stage prior to the acquittal of the accused on 16-11-2017. The parties shall appear before the court below on 22-10-2018 without further notice.

¶37

Dated this the 24^th day of September, 2018.

¶38

Sd/-B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

JUDGE

ani/

/true copy/

P.S. to Judge

T.K. Basheer & Co. v. Lal Tech Enterprises (P) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.K. Basheer & Co. v. Lal Tech Enterprises (P) Ltd.

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

Sajeev.S Vs State of Kerala

Abhilash T.S. Vs State of Kerala

Shaju Athomas Vs Aji Raghavan

T.K. Basheer & Co. Vs Lal Tech Enterprises (P) Ltd.

Ajith Ravi Vs Maradu Municipality

Bathisha Tharif Vs Central Bureau of Investigation