Allowed

N.T. Sugunan v. Sukhalal V.C.

Kerala HC9 Feb 2018CRL.A/51/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal, setting aside the lower court's acquittal under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. The court held that the acquittal was unsustainable as the accused failed to pay the costs required as a condition precedent to reopen evidence for cross-examination.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; acquittal set aside; trial restored to stage prior to acquittal; accused directed to appear.

N.T. Sugunan Vs Sukhalal V.C. — 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

FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 20TH MAGHA, 1939

¶5

CRL.A.No. 51 of 2018 IN CRLP. 540/2017

¶6

Crl.L.P. 540/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶7

ST 30/2017 of JFMC-III, CHERTHALA

¶8

APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER

¶9

N.T. SUGUNAN S/O.THANKAPPAN, AGED 72 YEARS, NIKATHIL, C.M.C.17, CHERTHALA.P.O.

¶10

BY ADV.SRI.J.OMPRAKASH

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED AND THE STATE:

¶12

1. SUKHALAL V.C. S/O.CHELLAPPAN, AGED 48, VAREKKATTUCHIRA, C.M.C.15, CHERTHALA.P.O., PIN- 688 524.

¶13

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

¶14

R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.B.JAYASURYA

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

STK

¶17

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

¶18

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

¶19

Crl. Appeal No.51 of 2018

¶20

Dated this the 9^th day of February, 2018

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The appellant is the complainant in S.T.No.30/2017 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 (in short, 'the N.I.Act'). On 24.07.2017, the complainant was not present before the court. An application filed on behalf of the complainant was dismisssed by the court below. Thereafter, the court below acquitted the appellant under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C.

¶23

Service is complete. However, there is no appearance for the first respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶24

The learned counsel for the appellant has produced certified copy of B-diary before this Court to show the proceedings of the court below. The said certified copy will form part of the records of this case. As

¶25

Crl. Appeal No.51 of 2018

¶26

-: 2 :-

¶27

per the proceedings of the court below, the complainant was examined-in-chief and Exts.P1 to P5 were marked on 8.5.2017. Thereafter, the case was adjourned to 9.5.2017. On that day, the accused was not present and hence the Non-Bailable Warrant was issued against him. Thereafter, the case was posted to 16.05.2017 and from that date to 17.06.2017 and from that date to 14.07.2017. On 14.07.2017, a petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the accused praying for re-opening the evidence for cross-examining the complainant. The said application was allowed by the court below on a cost of Rs.500/-. Thereafter, the case stood posted to 17.07.2017 for cross-examination of PW1 and from that date to 24.07.2017. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the cost was not paid. However, the court below on 24.07.2017 acquitted the accused under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. Since the complainant was examined-in-chief and the direction of the court below to pay the cost as a condition precedent

¶28

Crl. Appeal No.51 of 2018

¶29

-: 3 :-

¶30

to re-open the evidence of PW1 for the cross-examination of PW1 was not complied with, the court below was not justified in acquitting the accused under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. In the said circumstances, the said order cannot be sustained.

¶31

In the result,this appeal stands allowed, setting aside the order passed by the court below dated 24.07.2017 acquitting the accused under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. and S.T.No.30/2017 stands restored to the files of the court below. The court below is directed to dispose of S.T.No.30/2017 in accordance with law. The proceedings of the court below shall stand relegated to the stage prior to the acquittal of the accused on 24.07.2017. The appellant shall appear before the court below on 26.02.2018, without further notice.

¶32

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE

¶33

STK

N.T. Sugunan v. Sukhalal V.C.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.T. Sugunan v. Sukhalal V.C.

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

Monson K. Mathew Vs the C.B.I

Shihab Vs Debesh Kumar Behra

Rajeshkumar.T.K Vs State of Kerala

S. Harilal Vs Central Bureau of Investigation, Ernakulam

V.Krishnan Vs the Superintendent of Police

Mohammed Shafeek Vs the Superintendent of Police