Partly allowed

Prasad . R v. Amit Chhabani

Kerala HC23 Jun 2023Crl.Rev.Pet/202/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the criminal revision petition partly. It affirmed the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act but reduced the imprisonment sentence to jail till the rising of the court and granted ten months to remit the fine.

What did the court decide?

Imprisonment reduced till the rising of the court; ten months' time granted to remit fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-; coercive proceedings kept in abeyance for ten months.

Prasad . R Vs Amit Chhabani — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 2ND ASHADHA, 1945

¶5

CRL.REV.PET NO. 202 OF 2023

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTAPPEAL NO 90/2019 OF VI ADDITIONAL

¶7

DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM

¶8

CC 465/2016 OF JMFC(SPECIAL COURT) FOR TRIAL OF SEC.138, NI ACT

¶9

CASES

¶10

REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED

¶11

PRASAD . R
AGED 57 YEARS

¶12

M/S CURTAIN N DECOR, CARMEL CENTER BUILDING, BANERJI
ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682018

¶13

BY ADVS.
C.A.SUNIL
NIMI M.S.

¶14

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE

¶15

1AMIT CHHABANI
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O AHRISH KUMAR CHHABANI, 5C, INDRADHANUSH
APARTMENTS, TD ROAD, KOCHI, PIN – 682035

¶16

2STATE OF KERALA,
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

PP SANAL P. RAJ

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Crl.R.P No.202 of 2023

¶21

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Dated this the 23^rd day of June, 2023

¶24

The revision petitioner was the accused in C.C. No.465 of 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (N.I. Act cases), Ernakulam. The case originated from a complaint filed by the 1^st respondent alleging commission of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The allegation was that, in full and final settlement of the debt due to the complainant, the revision petitioner had issued three cheques, which, on presentation, were dishonoured for insufficiency of funds. Despite issuance of notice demanding the cheque amount, the petitioner failed to effect payment.

¶25

The trial court, after evaluation of evidence and consideration of the legal aspects, found the revision petitioner guilty and thereupon, convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, with default sentence of simple imprisonment for two weeks. The fine, if remitted, was directed to be paid as compensation to the complainant. The appellate court, after detailed consideration of

¶26

¶27

Crl.R.P No.202 of 2023

¶28

the legal and factual contentions, dismissed the appeal.

¶29

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the first respondent/complainant.

¶30

Although detailed arguments were advanced by the

¶31

learned Counsel, assailing the trial court and appellate court judgments, having carefully gone through those judgments, I find that the trial court had appreciated the evidence properly and applied the law correctly. That judgment having been affirmed in appeal, after reappreciation of evidence and consideration of the legal contentions, I find no reason to invoke the revisional jurisdiction.

¶32

Learned Counsel for the petitioner raised an alternative plea that the sentence may be reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and the time granted for remitting the fine may be extended.

¶33

In view of the huge amount involved and the offence under Section 138 of NI Act being quasi criminal in nature, I find the request to be reasonable.

¶34

The Crl. Revision Petition is hence allowed in part. The finding of guilt and conviction is affirmed. The sentence of simple imprisonment for 3 months is reduced to imprisonment for a

¶35

¶36

Crl.R.P No.202 of 2023

¶37

day, till the rising of the court. The petitioner is granted ten months' time for remitting/paying the fine amount. The petitioner shall remit/pay the fine and appear before the trial court, for undergoing sentence of imprisonment till the rising of the court, within the ten month period. In case of default in payment of fine within the extended time, the petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The coercive proceedings, if any pending against the petitioner, shall be kept in abeyance for ten months.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

smm

¶40

V.G.ARUN, JUDGE

Prasad . R v. Amit Chhabani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasad . R v. Amit Chhabani

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

P.M.Salim Vs State of Kerala

Sajitha a. Vs Samson and Sons Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Chandran Vs State of Kerala

M/S.Polinsys Immigration Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Vs C.Cheriyan

Prasad . R Vs Amit Chhabani

Shaji T.P Vs Sasidharan T.S