Allowed

Anilkumar R.M., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Dec 2020Crl.Rev.Pet/716/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, in a criminal revision petition, allowed the compounding of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act due to full payment of the cheque amount. Consequently, the petitioner was acquitted, judgments were set aside, and bail bonds discharged with waiver of costs.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision petition is allowed; petitioner acquitted; judgments below set aside; bail bonds discharged; cost waived.

Anilkumar R.M., Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No.716 OF 2020

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN C.C.NO.420/2009 DTD. 13.11.2009 IN CRA 76/2010 DATED 31-08-2010 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC), PALAKKAD

¶7

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN ST 420/2009 DATED 13-11-2009 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III,PALAKKAD

¶8

REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

¶9

ANILKUMAR R.M., AGED 42 YEARS S/O. MAYAPPAN, H.NO. 11/22, NEW NO.14/26, PULIKKODE HOUSE, MUTTIKULANGARA POST, PALAKKAD.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN

¶11

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶12

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

¶13

2 SAINUDHIN

¶14

NEAR OLD PANCHAYATH, PUDPPARIYAM, PALAKKAD,

¶15

R2 BY ADV. SHRI.RANJITH E N

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

PP SREEJA V.

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Crl.Rev.Pet.No.716 OF 2020 ..2..

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Dated this the 18th day of December 2020

¶22

The revision petitioner is aggrieved by his conviction and sentence in C.C.No.420/2009 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Palakkad, as affirmed in Criminal Appeal No.76/2010 of the Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc), Palakkad. The judgment convicting the revision petitioner was rendered on a complaint filed by the second respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶23

Crl.M.Appl.No.4/2020 has been filed by the revision petitioner and the second respondent, seeking permission to compound the offence.

¶24

The offence under Section 138 of the

¶25

N.I.Act is compoundable under Section 147 of the N.I.Act. Further, this Court is vested with the power

¶26

Crl.Rev.Pet.No.716 OF 2020 ..3..

¶27

to permit compounding under Section 320 (6) Cr.P.C. Considering that the entire amount has been paid, I am inclined to allow the request for compounding, which is having the effect of acquittal under section 320 (8) of Cr.P.C. Considering the prevailing circumstances, due to which all people from all walks of life are facing financial difficulties, the request for waiver of cost is allowed.

¶28

In the result, the Criminal revision petition is allowed. The judgments of the court below, by which the revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act, are set aside and the revision petitioner is acquitted. The

¶29

bail bonds of the revision petitioner and sureties are discharged. Sd/-

¶30

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶31

SB/18/12/2020

¶32

//true copy // P.A to Judge

Anilkumar R.M., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anilkumar R.M., v. State of Kerala

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

Robin Vs the State of Kerala

Anjalidev, Vs Arun

E.v.Ramakrishna Kurup Vs Gopinathan Pillai

M/S Sai Associates Vs State of Kerala

Sai Associates Vs State of Kerala

M/S Sai Associates Vs State of Kerala