IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl Rev Pet No. 54 of 2005(C)
1. DASAN CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR,
... Petitioner
Vs
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
1. JOSEPHINE, T.C.NO.47/874,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.K.CHETTIAR
For Respondent :SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :22/08/2007
O R D E R
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Crl. R.P. No. 54 OF 2005 B
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2007
O R D E R
The revision petitioner namely, Dasan described as the
Chairman-cum-Managing Director of M/s.Aancy Marine and Farm
Products Exporters Private Limited, challenges the conviction
entered and the sentence passed against him by the JFCM-II,
Thiruvananthapuram in C.C.No.180/98 as confirmed in Criminal
Appeal No.31/02 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Court,
Thiruvananthapuram.
2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner evidently
had no defence on the merits of the case. The only contention
raised by him was that going by the complaint filed by the 1st
respondent, the accused is a Company by name M/s. Aancy
Marine and Farm Products Exporters Private Limited represented
by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director Mr.Dasan. But the
person who has been shown as the accused in the judgments of
both the courts below is not the Company but Dasan, Chairman-
cum-Managing Director of the said Company and consequently
the sentence imposed is also one for imprisonment on Dasan. I
Crl.R.P.No.54/05
: 2 :
see some force in the said submission. Instead of the Company
which alone is the accused in the private complaint filed by the 1st
respondent, the courts below have not convicted the Company but
instead, Dasan, the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, who was
not prosecuted for the offence punishable under section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act. There appears to be a clerical
mistake wherein instead of showing the Company as the accused,
the revision petitioner Dasan has been shown as the accused
resulting in the courts convicted him and imposing on him a
sentence of imprisonment which is impermissible in the case of a
Company. Therefore, the judgments under revision are set aside.
The learned Magistrate shall rectify the proceedings by showing
the proper person as the accused. I make it clear that the
conviction recorded by the learned Magistrate is not interfered with
since the same is founded on adequate material. The trial court
shall pass a revised sentence after rectifying the cause title within
one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The
parties shall appear before the trial court without any further notice
on 10.9.07. After rectifying the cause title, the Magistrate shall
hear the complainant as well as the accused Company and pass a
Crl.R.P.No.54/05
: 3 :
proper sentence according to law. The Magistrate shall also
conduct an enquiry to find out the person who was responsible for
altering the accused by deviating from the cause title of the
complaint.
This revision is disposed of as above.
(V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE)
aks