Partly allowed

Ruksana Thayyil v. K.Ismail

Kerala HC10 Sept 2018Crl.MC/5689/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, in a criminal miscellaneous petition, modified a High Court order suspending sentence for cheque dishonour. It directed the trial court to allow the petitioner to deposit 15% of the fine instead of the required 1/4th, considering her lack of income sources.

What did the court decide?

Directed the trial court to permit the petitioner to deposit 15% of the fine instead of 1/4th for suspension of sentence.

Ruksana Thayyil Vs K.Ismail — 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 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 19TH BHADRA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 5689 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P.3677/2018 IN IN CRA 152/2018 of SESSIONS COURT,THALASSERY

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

RUKSANA THAYYIL

¶9

W/O.HAMZA, AGED 34 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, KUNIYIL RASHID MANZIL, P.O.KUTHUPARAMBA, NELLIMOOKU, NARAVOOR, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 632.

¶10

BY ADV. DR. V.N. SANKARJEE

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 K.ISMAIL

¶13

S/O .LATE ABDULKHADER, AGED 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT KANNOTH HOUSE, P.O.MAMBA, ANJARAKANDY AMSOM, MAMBA DESOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 001.

¶14

2 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SPL.GP.(VIGILANCE) SRI.A.RAJESH

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

Crl.MC.No. 5689 of 2018 -2-

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioner is the accused in S.T.No.9 of 2016 on

¶21

the files of the trial court. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the trial court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, against which the petitioner filed appeal. Along with the appeal, the petitioner filed C.M.P. No.3677 of 2018 praying for suspending the execution of the sentence. The court below, as per Ext.A III order, suspended the execution of sentence on condition of the petitioner depositing 1/4^th of the fine and executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court. Aggrieved by the quantum of amount directed to be deposited by the petitioner before the appellate court, as a

¶22

Crl.MC.No. 5689 of 2018 -3-

¶23

condition precedent to suspend the execution of sentence, this Crl.M.C. has been filed.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶25

The amount covered by Ext.P2 cheque is Rs.20,00,000/-. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a lady having no source of income to deposit the amount as directed by the appellate court. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is at present prepared to deposit 15% of the fine. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that a direction can be issued to the court below to permit the petitioner to deposit

¶26

15% of the fine instead of 1/4^th of the fine as directed by

¶27

Crl.MC.No. 5689 of 2018 -4-

¶28

the court below as per order in Crl.M.P. No.3677 of 2018,

¶29

to secure the ends of justice. It is ordered accordingly. To

¶30

the above extent, the order dated 14.8.2018 in Crl.M.P. No.3677 of 2018 in Crl.A. No.152 of 2018, stands modified.

¶31

The petitioner shall deposit the amount simultaneously

¶32

at the time of executing the bond. The petitioner is granted a period of one week to deposit the amount and execute the bond.

¶33

This Crl.M.C. stands disposed of as above.

¶34

Issue copy today itself.

¶35

Date this the 10^th day of September 2018. sd/

¶36

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE .

¶37

dl/

¶38

Crl.MC.No. 5689 of 2018 -5-

¶39

APPENDIX

¶40

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶41

ANNEXURE P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.07.2018 IN STC NO.9/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, THALASSERY.

¶42

ANNEXURE P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN CRL.APPEAL NO.152/2018.

¶43

ANNEXURE P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.08.2018 IN CRL.MP NO.3677/2018 IN CRL.A.152/2018

¶44

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

¶45

/True Copy/

¶46

PA to Judge

Ruksana Thayyil v. K.Ismail

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ruksana Thayyil v. K.Ismail

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

M/S. a.P.Varghese & Sons Vs M/S. Bensons International

Gangadharan Vs Krishna Sopanam Kuries (P) Ltd.

Suhara Vs Sulekha Majeed

K.v.Shaheer Vs State of Kerala

T. Sulaikha Vs T. Sathyapalan

Sheeja B.L Vs State of Kerala