Dismissed

Muralledharan Pillai v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 May 2023Crl.Rev.Pet/2789/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Kerala dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by Muralledharan Pillai. Held that though the petitioner had expired, the fine component remained recoverable from his property, so the petition had to be considered on merits before being dismissed on meritlessness.

What did the court decide?

Criminal revision petition dismissed; fine retained for recovery from the petitioner's property.

Muralledharan Pillai Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 8TH JYAISHTA, 1945
CRL.REV.PET NO. 2789 OF 2004

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCC 146/1993 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
FIRST CLASS , ADOOR

¶6

CRA 80/1998 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC), PATHANAMTHITTA
REVISION PETITIONER:

¶7

MURALLEDHARAN PILLAI,
S/O KRISHNA PILLAI,
ANUPAM-AYATHIL WARD, KOLLAM -17.
BY ADVS.
SRI.BAIJU JOHN
SRI.JOHN VARGHESETHOPPIL

¶8

RESPONDENT:

¶9

STATE OF KERALA
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶10

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 29.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

CRL.REV.PET NO. 2789 OF 2004

¶12

¶13

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶14

Crl.R.P. No.2789 of 2004

¶15

Dated this the 29^th day of May, 2023

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the revision petitioner expired on 30-10-2020 and till date, the legal heirs have not come on record.

¶18

The accused was sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 380 of IPC and six months simple imprisonment for offence under Section 461 of IPC by the court of first instance. The appeal preferred as Criminal Appeal No.80/1988 was dismissed. In view of the imposition of the fine, the revision petition will not abate and hence the revision petition is required to be considered on merits.

¶19

According to the prosecution, the accused was the owner of the cashew company under the name ‘Murali Cashew Company’. Loans were availed by the company from the Corporation Bank Kollam to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- for his

¶20

¶21

CRL.REV.PET NO. 2789 OF 2004

¶22

business purposes by pledging and hypothecating raw cashew nuts and cashew kernels. Though the pledged articles were kept under lock and key in the godown of the accused, the articles were in the dejure possession of the Bank. Contrary to the arrangement, the accused is alleged to have committed theft of the raw cashew nuts and the cashew kernels during the period 12-04-1988 and 22-06-1988 and thereby committed the offences alleged.

¶23

In order to prove the prosecution case they examined PW-1 to PW-13 and marked Ext.P1 to Ext.P16. The trial court after analysing the evidence found the accused guilty and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and a fine of Rs.1000/- for the offence under 380 IPC and also to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 461 of the IPC.

¶24

The appellate court after appreciating the evidence adduced confirmed the findings of the trial court and dismissed the appeal.

¶25

On a perusal of the judgment and the records produced along with the memorandum of the revision petition, I am of the view that no case is made out for any interference on the finding

¶26

CRL.REV.PET NO. 2789 OF 2004

¶27

¶28

of guilt. However, since the revision petitioner is stated to have expired, only the sentence of fine can be retained for the purpose of recovery from the property of the accused.

¶29

Therefore, I find no merit in the criminal revision petition, and the same is dismissed.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶32

AJM

Muralledharan Pillai v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muralledharan Pillai 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

Shafeeque Vs State of Kerala

Umaiba Vs Abdul Nazeer @ Rasheed

Liju Vs State of Kerala

K.v.George Vs State of Kerala

K.Prahladan Vs Babu

P. Aboobacker Haji Vs State of Kerala