Allowed

Gopalan Master and 2 Others v. K.Radhakrishnan Nair and Another

Kerala HC16 Oct 2023Crl.Rev.Pet/686/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision petition challenging conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the NI Act, the court allowed the petition by way of composition. The court found that the dispute had been settled via a compounding petition filed in the revision court under Section 147 of the NI Act read with Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C., deemed bonafide, and set aside the concurrent convictions.

What did the court decide?

The revision petition was allowed by way of composition. The conviction and sentence in Criminal Appeal No.104/2007 and Criminal Case No.335/2005 were set aside. Bail bonds were cancelled.

Gopalan Master and 2 Others Vs K.Radhakrishnan Nair and… — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 24TH ASWINA, 1945

¶5

CRL.REV.PET NO. 686 OF 2011

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 335/2005 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

¶7

FIRST CLASS -II, KASARAGOD

¶8

CRA 104/2007 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC), KASARAGOD

¶9

REVISION PETITIONER/S:

¶10

1 GOPALAN MASTER,S/O.LATE PAPPU, HINDU, RETIRED, TEACHER,RESIDING AT 'SAKETHAM',, NELLITHAVE, P.O.KUTTIKOLE, (VIA.CHENGALA),, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶11

2 SATHEESH KUMAR.K. SO. K.P.SREEDHARAN NAIR, HINDU, BUSINESSMAN BY PROFESSION,, RESIDING AT 'KRISHNA NIVAS', P.O.BEKAL-671318,, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶12

3 V.KRISHNAN SO. LATE P.V.KANNAN, HINDU,BUSINESSMAN AND FILM DIRECTOR BY, PROFESSION, RESIDING AT PERINGANAM, P.O.MUNNAD, (VIA.CHENGALA), KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶13

BY ADVS. SRI.ALAN PAPALI SMT.ANITHA MATHAI MUTHIRENTHY SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN SRI.GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA SRI.SOJAN MICHEAL

¶14

RESPONDENT/S:

¶15

1 K.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, S/O.M.NARAYANAN NAIR, HINDU, AGRICULTURIST, RESIDING AT, NEYYANGAYAM IN MULIYAR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK, AND DISTRICT, P.O.KANATHUR, PIN-671 318.

¶16

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

¶17

BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN

¶18

CRL.REV.PET NO. 686 OF 2011

¶19

¶20

OTHER PRESENT:

¶21

SR PP SR PP SMT PUSHPALATHA M K

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

¶24

CRL.REV.PET NO. 686 OF 2011

¶25

(Dated this the 16^th day of October, 2023)

¶26

ORDER

¶27

The revision petition is filed challenging the correctness and legality of the judgment in Cr.A No.104/2007 of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-I), Kasaragod (Appellate Court) confirming the conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.335/2005 by the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kasaragod finding the revision petitioners guilty for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short, “N.I.Act”).

¶28

The facts in brief:

¶29

The 1^st respondent had filed the complaint against the revision petitioners alleging them to have committed the offences under Section 138 of the N.I.Act.

¶30

The learned Magistrate, after analysing the materials on record, convicted the revision petitioners for the above offence and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month each and

¶31

CRL.REV.PET NO. 686 OF 2011

¶32

¶33

pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- each to the 1^st respondent under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, 'Code') and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

¶34

The Appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by the revision petitioners, confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court.

¶35

It is aggrieved by the concurrent judgments

¶36

passed by the courts below, the present revison petition is filed.

¶37

Heard; Sri.Gilbert George Correya, the learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioners; Sri.M.V.Amaresh, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent-bank and Smt.S.Seetha, the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

¶38

When the revision petition was taken up for consideration, the learned Counsel appearing for the

¶39

¶40

CRL.REV.PET NO. 686 OF 2011

¶41

parties in unison submitted that the subject matter in dispute between the parties has been settled out of Court. Consequently, the 1^st revision petitioner and the 1^st respondent have filed Criminal M.A.No.1/2023 to compound the offence under Section 147 of the N.I.Act.

¶42

I have gone through the compounding petition filed by the parties, which is counter signed by the respective counsel, and have found the same to be bonafide, genuine and in accordance with law.

¶43

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made across the Bar and after perusing Criminal M.A. No.1/2023, I am of the view that the offence committed by the revision petitioners can be compounded by invoking the powers of this Court under Section 147 of the N.I.Act read with Section 320(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). Hence, I am inclined to allow the revision petition by way of composition.

¶44

In the result:

¶45

(i) The revision petition is allowed;

¶46

CRL.REV.PET NO. 686 OF 2011

¶47

¶48

(ii) The conviction and sentence passed in Criminal Appeal No.104/2007 by the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, (Adhoc-I), Kasaragod and in C.C.No.335/2005 by the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kasaragod as against the revision petitioners are set aside by way of composition under Section 147 of the N.I.Act read with Section 320 (8) of the Cr.P.C.

¶49

(iii) The bail bonds executed by the revision petitioners and their sureties shall stand hereby cancelled.

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS JUDGE

rkc/16.10.23

CRL.REV.PET NO. 686 OF 2011

¶54

¶55

APPENDIX OF CRL.REV.PET 686/2011

¶56

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶57

Annexure A A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.12.2018 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN CRL RP NO. 488 OF 2011

Gopalan Master and 2 Others v. K.Radhakrishnan Nair and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopalan Master and 2 Others v. K.Radhakrishnan Nair and Another

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

Mukundan Vs Unnikrishnan

Financial Credits and Chits Company(P)Lt Vs Sidhique and Others

Subramanian Unni @ G.S.Unni Vs State of Kerala and Another

Gopalakrishnan Kartha Vs State of Kerala

Sherief Vs C.M.Khamarunnisa

Fr.Dr.Sebastian Kanjirathinkal Vs N.P.Hamsa and Another