Partly allowed

Biju v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jul 2023Crl.Rev.Pet/570/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision petition under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court affirmed the conviction but modified the sentence of imprisonment from six months to one day. The court also granted the accused four months to pay the fine, provided that cumulative imprisonment of three months would follow non-payment.

What did the court decide?

Conviction affirmed. Sentence of six months imprisonment modified to deportation of one day. Four months' time granted for payment of fine, failing which imprisonment of three months.

Biju Vs the State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 13^TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1945

¶5

CRL.REV.PET NO. 570 OF 2023

¶6

ST 1789/2013 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,

¶7

PONNANI

¶8

CRA 118/2018 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, TIRUR

¶9

REVISION PETITIONER/S:

¶10

BIJU AGED 45 YEARS S/O BHASKARAN, RESIDING AT PALLIVALAPPIL HOUSE, EDAPPAL.P.O,PONNANI TALUK MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679576 BY ADVS. K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH PRAJIT RATNAKARAN

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

¶13

2 MOHANAN ( DIED) S/O PULIYAKAVIL ACHAPPA, RESIDING AT PULIYAKAVIL HOUSE, EDAPPAL AMSOM, THUYYAM DESAOM EDAPPAL.P.O, PONNANI TALUK. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679576

¶14

3 PUSHPA W/O MOHANAN RESIDING AT PULIYAKAVIL HOUSE, EDAPPAL AMSOM, THUYYAM DESOM EDAPPAL.P.O, PONNANI TALUK. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679576

¶15

4 DHANESH S/O MOHANAN RESIDING AT PULIYAKAVIL HOUSE, EDAPPAL AMSOM, THUYYAM DESAOM EDAPPAL.P.O, PONNANI TALUK. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679576

¶16

5 DINESH S/O MOHANAN RESIDING AT PULIYAKAVIL HOUSE, EDAPPAL AMSOM, THUYYAM DESAOM EDAPPAL.P.O, PONNANI TALUK. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679576

¶17

6 DHANYA D/O MOHANAN RESIDING AT PULIYAKAVIL HOUSE,

¶18

Crl.R.P.No.570 of 2023

¶19

-2-

¶20

EDAPPAL AMSOM, THUYYAM DESAOM EDAPPAL.P.O, PONNANI TALUK. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679576 7 CHITRA D/O MOHANAN RESIDING AT PULIYAKAVIL HOUSE, EDAPPAL AMSOM, THUYYAM DESAOM EDAPPAL.P.O, PONNANI TALUK. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679576 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶21

OTHER PRESENT:

¶22

SR.PP.RENJITH GEORGE

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

Crl.R.P.No.570 of 2023

¶25

-3-

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Dated this the 13^th day of July, 2023

¶28

The revision petitioner is the accused in

¶29

S.T.No.1789 of 2013 of the Judicial First Class

¶30

Magistrate Court, Ponnani. The case originated from a complaint filed by the second respondent, alleging commission of the offence under Section

¶31

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The allegation was that, in discharge of his liability of Rs.1,50,000/-, the revision petitioner issued a cheque, which, on

¶32

presentation, was dishonoured for insufficiency of funds. Despite issuance of notice demanding payment of the cheque amount, the revision

¶33

petitioner failed to make the payment. Hence, the complaint was filed.

¶34

The trial court, after appreciation of evidence and the legal contentions, found the

¶35

Crl.R.P.No.570 of 2023

¶36

-4-

¶37

revision petitioner guilty and thereupon, convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and directed to pay compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. The appellate court, after detailed consideration of the legal and factual contentions, dismissed the appeal, confirming the finding of guilt and conviction.

¶38

Although learned Counsel for the

¶39

revision petitioner argued vehemently, having carefully scrutinised the trial and appellate court judgments, I find the courts below to have appreciated the evidence and applied the law correctly. As such, there is no reason to

¶40

exercise the revisional jurisdiction. Learned Counsel for the revision petitioner then made an alternative submission that, if this Court is not convinced of the grounds urged, at least, the sentence of imprisonment may be reduced and the revision petitioner granted some time for paying the fine amount.

¶41

Crl.R.P.No.570 of 2023

¶42

Inasmuch as the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act is quasi-criminal in nature

¶43

and the object of the Act is to provide authenticity to cheque transactions, there is no need to sentence the revision petitioner for six months. Considering the facts and circumstances under which the transaction had taken place, some more time can also be granted for payment of the fine amount.

¶44

In the result, the criminal revision petition

¶45

is allowed in part. The finding of guilt and conviction is affirmed. The sentence of imprisonment is modified and reduced to imprisonment for a day, till rising of the court. The revision petitioner is granted four months' time for paying the fine amount, failing which he shall undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The revision petitioner shall pay the

¶46

fine amount and appear before the trial court for undergoing the sentence of imprisonment within

¶47

Crl.R.P.No.570 of 2023

¶48

four months. The coercive steps, if any pending against the revision petitioner, shall be kept in abeyance for four months.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶51

Scl/

Biju v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju v. the 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

Sunil Kumar.N Vs R.Ramachandran

A.Haris Vs State of Kerala

M/S Vodafone Idea Limited, Vs Secretary, Ministry of Communications

Devadas.G Vs Prasanna

Muthalif M.M Vs State of Kerala

Sandeep S.U Vs State of Kerala