High Court Kerala High Court

Vasanthi vs State Of Kerala on 23 March, 2007

Kerala High Court
Vasanthi vs State Of Kerala on 23 March, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3866 of 2006()


1. VASANTHI, W/O. PUZHKAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. RAVEENDRAN (DEAD), S/O. VELAYUDHAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SHEEJO CHACKO

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :23/03/2007

 O R D E R






                            R. BASANT, J.

             -------------------------------------------------

                  CRL.M.C.NO. 3866 OF  2006

             -------------------------------------------------

             Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2007



                                ORDER

The petitioner is the complainant in a prosecution under

Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused in

the case was found guilty, convicted and sentenced. The

same was challenged and the verdict of guilty and conviction

were upheld by this Court in revision. The matter was sent

back to the learned Magistrate for imposition of an

appropriate sentence or to report composition, if any. At that

stage, the accused expired. Though there is a conviction, it is

not followed by any sentence imposed. The charge abated and

the proceedings came to a grinding halt.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings, an amount

of Rs.15,000/- had been deposited before the learned

Magistrate by the accused. After the charge abated, the

complainant – the petitioner herein applied for release of the

CRL.M.C.NO. 3866 OF 2006 -: 2 :-

said amount. The learned Magistrate rightly took note of the

fact that there is no sentence and in these circumstances, the

amount deposited cannot legally be released to the complainant.

The complainant has come to this Court with this Crl.M.C. to

challenge the said order of the learned Magistrate.

3. After discussions at the Bar, the petitioner/complainant

was directed to explain why the legal heirs of the deceased

accused have not been arrayed as a party. It is at this stage that

the wife of the deceased has come before this Court with

Crl.M.A.No.1305/07 to get herself impleaded as a party. The

said petition is allowed and the said petitioner is impleaded as

additional respondent No.3.

4. The additional respondent No.3 submits that she has no

objection in the amount being released to the complainant. I am

of opinion that in these circumstances the want of objections on

the part of the widow of the deceased can be taken due note of

and the amount in deposit can be directed to be released to the

complainant in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case.

I am satisfied that such a direction shall eminently serve the

interests of justice.

5. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. The learned

CRL.M.C.NO. 3866 OF 2006 -: 3 :-

Magistrate shall release the amount of Rs.15,000/- which is

available in deposit (as deposited by the accused. In the case

who has been found guilty and convicted and which verdict of

guilty and conviction have already become final) to the

complainant i.e., the petitioner herein.

Sd/-

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/

//true copy//

P.S. to Judge