Allowed

N.Joseph Emmanuvel v. K.R.Prasad

Kerala HC23 Jul 2019CRL.A/2055/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal filed by the complainant against an acquittal of the accused under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court set aside the acquittal order and directed the lower court to proceed with the complaint after noting the appellant's diligent prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Acquittal order dated 26.04.2008 set aside; lower court directed to proceed with complaint; appellant to appear on 2.9.2019.

N.Joseph Emmanuvel Vs K.R.Prasad — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2019 / 1ST SRAVANA, 1941

¶5

CRL.A.No.2055 OF 2008

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN S.T.No.1571/2006 DATED 26-04-2008 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOTTAYAM

¶7

APPELLANT/S:

¶8

N.JOSEPH EMMANUVEL

¶9

NOOZHUMURIYIL HOUSE, MALLAPPALLY WEST P.O., MALLAPPALLY, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW SKARIA

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 K.R.PRASAD KATTODIL HOUSE,ERAVIPEROOR P.O., THIRUVALLA, PRASAD CYCLES, NEAR SARAD BARBER SHOP, MALLAPPALLY WEST P.O.

¶13

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

¶14

BY ADVS. SMT.LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR SRI.L.RAJESH NARAYAN R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

CRL.A.No.2055 of 2008

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The appellant is the complainant in

¶19

S.T.No.1571/2006 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 court below as per order dated 26.04.2008 acquitted the first respondent under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C., against which this appeal has been filed.

¶20

2. Service is complete. However, there is no appearance for the first respondent.

¶21

CRL.A.No.2055 of 2008

¶22

3. Heard the learned counsel for the

¶23

appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶24

4. The learned counsel for the appellant

¶25

has submitted that the appellant was laid up on 26.04.2008 and hence he could not appear before the court on that day. The learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that an application was also filed for the appellant to condone the absence of the appellant on that date. However, the said application was rejected by the court below and thereafter, the court below acquitted the accused under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. It appears that the appellant was present before the court below

¶26

CRL.A.No.2055 of 2008

¶27

-4-

¶28

on the previous posting date also.

¶29

5. Having gone through the proceedings of the court below, I am satisfied that the appellant was diligently prosecuting the case. In the said circumstances, 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.

¶30

In the result, this appeal stands allowed, setting aside order dated 26.4.2008 in S.T.No.1571/2006 passed by the court below, acquitting the accused under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. and the court below is

¶31

CRL.A.No.2055 of 2008

¶32

-5-

¶33

directed to proceed with the complaint, in accordance with law. The proceedings of the court below shall stand relegated to the stage prior to the acquittal of the accused on 26.4.2008. The appellant shall appear before the court below on 2.9.2019 without

¶34

further notice.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE

¶37

STK

N.Joseph Emmanuvel v. K.R.Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Joseph Emmanuvel v. K.R.Prasad

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

C.Anil Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Chandrashekharan Pillai Vs State of Kerala

Balakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Edward @ Raju Vs State of Kerala

Vijayakumary,D/O. Thamarakshi, Vs State of Kerala

T.O.Varghese Vs Geetha Babu