P.M.Noorudhin vs The State Of Kerala on 21 December, 2006

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 2702 of 2003()


1. P.M.NOORUDHIN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SRI.MURALIDHARAN NAIR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.G.ANIL BABU

                For Respondent  :SRI.GIGIMON ISSAC

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :21/12/2006

 O R D E R


                                          K. HEMA, J.

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

                               Crl. R.P. No. 2702 of 2003

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

                 Dated this the 21st day of December 2006




                                               O R D E R

The revision petitioner is the accused in CC. No. 266 of 2000 on the

file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Erattupetta. Second respondent is the

complainant therein. Revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the

Magistrate’s Court to undergo simple imprisonment for six months under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act . In appeal filed by him, the

conviction and sentence were confirmed by the Sessions Court, Kottayam.

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. 13229 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 second respondent. 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.

3. It is also submitted by both parties that the amount deposited by

revision petitioner before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Erattupetta

during the pendency of the proceedings can be ordered to be released to the

second respondent-complainant. There is no ground to refuse this prayer.

Crl. R.P. 2702 /2003 2

In the result,

i) Revision petitioner is acquitted of offence under Section 138

of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as offence is compounded.

He is set at liberty forthwith.

ii) The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Erattupetta is directed to

release the amount in deposit to the second respondent.

Crl. M.A.No.13229 of 2006 and revision petition are allowed.

K. HEMA, JUDGE.

smp