High Court Kerala High Court

M.V.Murshid Ahammed vs K.V.Abdul Azeez on 15 December, 2006

Kerala High Court
M.V.Murshid Ahammed vs K.V.Abdul Azeez on 15 December, 2006
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 1442 of 2006()


1. M.V.MURSHID AHAMMED, S/O. AHAMMEDKOYA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. K.V.ABDUL AZEEZ, S/O. HYDORSS,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :15/12/2006

 O R D E R
                                        K. HEMA, J.

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

                        CRL. R.P. NO.  1442 OF 2006

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

             Dated this the 15th day of December, 2006.


                                        O R D E R

The revision petitioner is the accused in S.T. No. 530 of 2004 on the

file of Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Marad Cases), Kozhikode.

First respondent is the complainant therein. Revision petitioner was

convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and

sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay

Rs. 6,75,000/- as compensation to the complainant and in default to undergo

simple imprisonment for two months. In appeal filed by him, the conviction

and direction for payment of compensation were confirmed, but sentence

was modified by the Sessions Court, Kozhikode. This revision arises from the

said conviction and sentence.

2. At the time of hearing, both sides submitted that a petition as

Crl. M.A. No. 12801 of 2006 is filed for compounding the offence. It is also

submitted by both sides that the matter is settled out of court amicably

between the parties and the amount involved is also paid by the petitioner to

the satisfaction of the first respondent.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted

that the petitioner had deposited Rs. 20,000/- before the trial court during

the pendency of the proceedings and a request is made that it may be

returned to the first respondent-complainant. Both sides agreed that an

order can be passed accordingly. Hence, the trial court is directed to release

CRL. R.P. 1442/2006 2

Rs. 20,000/- in deposit in this case to the first respondent-complainant.

On hearing both sides and on going through the averments in the

petition, I am satisfied that this is a fit case to grant permission to compound

the offence. The revision petitioner is acquitted of offence under Section 138

of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as compounded. He is set at liberty

forthwith.

Crl.M.A.No.12801 of 2006 and revision petition are allowed.

K. HEMA, JUDGE.

smp