The accused were acquitted in two cheque dishonour cases. The complainant filed criminal appeals. Upon hearing, the court was satisfied that the dispute had been settled out of court and the appeals were not pressed.
The appeals were dismissed because the matter was settled out of court and not pressed by the appellant.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1941
CRL.A.No.494 of 2010
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ST 398/2006 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -VII, TRIVANDRUM DATED 05-01-2010
APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:
JOOSTAR MASCREEN PALLIVILAKOM PURAYIDOM, POONTHURA,, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY
RESPONDENT/ACCUSED & STATE:
1 JOHNY FERNANDEZ AND ANOTHER L & L MONEY TRANSFER,NEAR GANDHI MEMORIAL LIBRARY, PUTHUKURICHI, RESIDING AT ST.JUDE VILLA, A BLOCK,, FLAT NO.3, SREEKARYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN SRI.T.A.GEORGE JOSEPH SRI SANTHOSH PETER-SR PP
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.07.2019, ALONG WITH CRL.A.715/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.A.No.494/2010 & 715/2010
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1941
CRL.A.No.715 of 2010
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ST 476/2006 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -VII, TRIVANDRUM DATED 05-01-2010
APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:
JOOSTAR MASCREEN PALLIVILAKOM PURAYIDOM, POONTHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY SMT.K.R.RIJA RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED & STATE:
1 JOHNY FERNANDEZ
L AND L MONEY TRANSFER,NEAR GANDHI MEMORIAL LIBRARY, PUTHUKURICHI,, RESIDING AT ST.JUDE VILLA, A.BLOCK FLAT NO.3,, SREEKARYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN SRI.T.A.GEORGE JOSEPH
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.07.2019, ALONG WITH CRL.A.494/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.A.No.494/2010 & 715/2010
3
JUDGMENT
The appellant is the same in these two
appeals. He is the complainant in two cases before
the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VII, Thiruvananthapuram involving the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court acquitted the accused on merits in both the cases. Against the said judgment of acquittal dated 5.1.2010, the complainant has come up in appeal with the leave of this Court.
on the last occasion, it was submitted that the
parties have come to terms practically, and the
dispute stands almost settled. Today a copy of the affidavit filed by the complainant in the court
below in ST 281/2007 was shown to me by the
learned counsel for the accused. This affidavit shows that the entire dispute stands settled, that he would withdraw ST 281/2007 and also these two
CRL.A.No.494/2010 & 715/2010
4
appeals pending before the High Court, and instead the accused would withdraw C.C 36/2006 pending against the complainant. The affidavit filed by the appellant in the court below in the other case is not disputed. I find reason to believe that the parties have amicably settled the whole dispute out of court. In view of the settlement made out of court, these appeals are not pressed by the appellant. The two appeals are accordingly dismissed.
/True copy/ P.S to Judge
Sd/P.UBAID JUDGE
ma
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal appeals against acquittal should be disposed of in light of the settlement reached between parties.
JOOSTAR MASCREEN PALLIVILAKOM PURAYIDOM
JOHNY FERNANDEZ AND ANOTHER
STATE OF KERALA
P.UBAID
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
