Allowed

Shyju K.P. v. P.G.Sathyamoorthi

Kerala HC4 Apr 2019Crl.Rev.Pet/358/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed the criminal revision petition against a conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the NI Act. The court granted leave to compound the offence following the death of the complainant and a settlement filed by the respondents, holding that composition results in acquittal.

What did the court decide?

Leave to compound the offence granted, Crl.M.A.6/2019 allowed, and revision petition allowed with effect of acquittal.

Shyju K.P. Vs P.G.Sathyamoorthi — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BABU

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1941

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 358 of 2019

¶6

CRA 237/2011 of ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT - I, KALPETTA

¶7

ST 4859/2010 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-I, SULTHANBATHERY

¶8

REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT

¶9

SHYJU K.P. DREAMS LAND LADIES COLLECTIONS, NEAR STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, BATHERY BRANCH,SULTHANBATHERY.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN SMT.SIKHA S.NAIR

¶11

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/STATE

¶12

1 P.G.SATHYAMOORTHI, DIVAKARANS QUARTERS, DOTTAPPANKULAM, BEENACHI POST, SULTHAN BATHERY-673592.

¶13

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

¶14

3 ADDL. R3. SATHI, W/O P.G.SATHYAMOORTHI, DIVAKARAN'S QUARTERS, DOTTAPPANKULAM, BEENACHI POST, SULTHAN BATHERY.

¶15

(ADDITIONAL R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 01/04/2019 IN CRL.M.A. NO. 4/2019 IN R.P. NO.358/19.)

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.MADHU N.NAMBOOTHIRIPAD

Crl.R.P.358/2019

OTHER PRESENT:

SRI. C.N.PRABHAKARAN-SR.PP

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.R.P.358/2019

ORDER

1.The revision petitioner is the accused in a prosecution under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short the NI Act). He was convicted and sentenced by the trial court. He appealed, but lost. The revision is filed impugning the judgment in appeal.

¶26

2.Heard Sri.Rajesh Vijayan, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.Madhu N.Nampoothiripad, the learned counsel for the third respondent.

¶27

3.The appeal was dismissed on 5.6.2014. The complainant died on 21.8.2014. A copy of the death certificate is produced. The learned advocates for the revision petitioner and the third respondent submit that before the death of the complainant, he was paid all his dues by the revision petitioner. It is also submitted that before the matter could

¶28

be brought to the notice of this court, the complainant

¶29

Crl.R.P.358/2019

¶30

¶31

died. The third respondent is the widow of the complainant. An application for compounding the offence has been jointly filed by the revision petitioner and the third respondent. The said application is numbered Crl.M.A.6/2019. It shows that every dispute has been settled amicably and what was due to the complainant was paid to him. The learned counsel for the third respondent submits that his client has no grievance subsisting now. In these circumstances, I grant leave to compound the offence and allow Crl.M.A.6/2019.

¶32

4.As already stated, leave has been granted and the application for compounding has been allowed. The revision is therefore allowed. The composition of the offence shall have the effect of acquittal.

¶33

A.M.BABU

¶34

Judge

¶35

Mrcs/4.4.

Shyju K.P. v. P.G.Sathyamoorthi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyju K.P. v. P.G.Sathyamoorthi

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

Liju, Vs State of Kerala

Ganesan, Vs State of Kerala

Shihabudheen, Vs State of Kerala

Bhuvaneswari Vs State of Kerala

Nithhin Xavier Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Vs the State of Kerala