High Court Kerala High Court

Anitha vs Kunjukutty on 8 July, 2009

Kerala High Court
Anitha vs Kunjukutty on 8 July, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 937 of 2009()


1. ANITHA , AGED 59, W/O. SUBBAYYAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KUNJUKUTTY, KELAGANEZHATHU HOUSE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, TO BE REP. BY PUBLIC

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.BIMAL PRASAD

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH

 Dated :08/07/2009

 O R D E R
                          THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.
                = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                            CRL. R.P. NO.937 of 2009
                = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                     Dated this the 8th day of July,   2009

                                   O R D E R

————–

This revision is in challenge of judgment of learned

Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-III), North Parur in Crl. Appeal

No.718 of 2008 confirming conviction and sentence for offence

punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for

short, “the Act”).

2. Petitioner and respondent No.1 filed Crl.M.A No.6380 of

2009 reporting settlement and seeking permission to compound the

offence.

3. It is seen from application No.6380 of 2009 that parties

have settled the dispute out of court. There is no reason to think that

the composition is not voluntary. Offence under Section 138 of the Act

is made compoundable under Section 147 of the Act. Hence

permission is granted and Crl.M.A. No.6380 of 2009 is allowed. The

composition entered between petitioner and respondent No.1 is

accepted and that shall have the effect of acquittal of the petitioner

under Section 320(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that as per order of

learned Additional Sessions Judge a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty

CRL. R.P. No.937 of 2009

-: 2 :-

thousand only) and as per order of this Court another sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) are deposited in the trial

court. According to learned counsel as per the agreement entered

between petitioner and respondent No.1, respondent No.1 is entitled

to withdraw the said amount. Counsel says that petitioner has no

objection in respondent No.1 withdrawing the said amount. Hence it

is directed that the amount if any deposited by petitioner in the trial

court shall be paid to respondent No.1 on application.

Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of as above.

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.

vsv

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.

===================
CRL. R.P. NO. OF 2000
===================

O R D E R

JUNE, 2009