IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl Rev Pet No. 4184 of 2006()
1. SURESH KUMAR.G.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :28/11/2006
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
...................................................................................
CRL. R.P. 4184 OF 2006
...................................................................................
Dated this the 28th November , 2006
O R D E R
The petitioner was found guilty of the offence under section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act . The trial court sentenced him to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay compensation
of Rs.40,000/- and in default of payment of compensation, to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of one month. On appeal, the appellate
court confirmed the conviction and sentence and dismissed the appeal.
2. Crl.M.A.No. 12097 of 2006 was filed by the complainant as well
as the accused under section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and
that application was allowed.
In the result, the Crl. Revision Petition is allowed. The conviction
and sentence imposed on the petitioner/accused are set aside and he is
acquitted under section 320(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk
CRL.R.P. 4184 OF 2006
2
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
...................................................................................
CRL. M.A.No. 12097 OF 2006 IN
CRL. R.P.No. 4184 OF 2006
...................................................................................
Dated this the 28th November , 2006
O R D E R
This is an application filed under section 147 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act seeking permission to compound the offence under
section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The application is signed
by the complainant as well as the accused and their counsel. It is stated in
the application that the dispute between the parties is settled. Hence the
application is allowed.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk
CRL.R.P. 4184 OF 2006
3
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
...................................................................................
CRL. M.A.No. 11827 OF 2006 IN
CRL. R.P. 4184 OF 2006
...................................................................................
Dated this the 28th November , 2006
O R D E R
This is an application to condone the delay of 92 days in filing the
Revision Petition. The parties have settled the dispute and have filed an
application under section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act .
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the delay is condoned.
Number the Crl. Revision Petition and the application filed under section
147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act .
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk
? IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
+Crl Rev Pet No. 4181 of 2006()
#1. E.Y.NAJEEB, S/O. YOOSUF,
... Petitioner
Vs
$1. MANOJ V.D., S/O. DAMODARAN,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
! For Petitioner :SRI.K.K.MOIDEEN
^ For Respondent :SRI.JOHN JUDE ISSAC
*Coram
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
% Dated :28/11/2006
: O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
………………………………………………………………………..
CRL. R.P. 4181 OF 2006
………………………………………………………………………..
Dated this the 28th November , 2006
O R D E R
The petitioner was convicted for the offence under section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act and he was sentenced to undergo simple
imprisonment for six months and was ordered to pay a sum of Rs. 90,000/-
to the complainant as compensation under section 357(3) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure and in default of payment of compensation , to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The
petitioner challenged the conviction and sentence in Appeal. The appellate
court confirmed the conviction and sentence and dismissed the Appeal.
2. Crl.M.A.No. 12089 of 2006 filed by the parties under section 147
of the Negotiable Instruments Act was allowed. Accordingly, Crl. Revision
Petition is allowed. The conviction and the sentence imposed on the
petitioner are set aside and he is acquitted under section 320(8) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
Crl. Revision Petition is disposed of as above.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk
CRL.R.P. 4181 OF 2006
2
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
………………………………………………………………………..
CRL. M.A.No. 12089 OF 2006 IN
CRL. R.P.No. 4181 OF 2006
………………………………………………………………………..
Dated this the 28th November , 2006
O R D E R
This is an application filed by the petitioner/accused and the first
respondent/complainant under section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, seeking permission to compound the offence under section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is stated in the application that the
dispute between the parties is settled and that Annexure-I agreement was
executed. As per the terms of compromise, the first respondent/
complainant is entitled to withdraw the amount of Rs.20,000/- deposited
by the revision petitioner before the trial court .
Compromise is recorded and the petition is allowed.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk
CRL.R.P. 4181 OF 2006
3
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
………………………………………………………………………..
CRL. R.P. 4181 OF 2006
………………………………………………………………………..
Dated this the 28th November , 2006
O R D E R
The Revision is filed against the judgment dated 21.06.2006. Free
copy was issued on 17.11.2006. The Registry noted a defect that the
Revision is time barred. It was replied by the counsel for the petitioner
stating that the copy was ready only on 17.11.2006. There is no
endorsement on the free copy as to when the copy was ready and whether
any application was submitted by the petitioner for issue of the copy. It is
also not noted as to whether any date was notified for receiving the copy. I
have held in Ouso and others. vs. Cheekku and another (Un-
numbered Crl.R.P. of 2006 filed against Crl. Appeal. 279 of 2005 on
the file of the IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Ernakulam) that a free copy
issued under section 363 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should
CRL.R.P. 4181 OF 2006
4
contain necessary endorsements to facilitate computation of the period of
limitation. Since necessary endorsements are absent on the copy
produced along with the memorandum of Revision, I hold that the Revision
is not time barred.
Number the Crl. Revision Petition and the application filed under
section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk
CRL.R.P. 4181 OF 2006
5
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
………………………………………………………………………..
CRL. R.P. 4181 OF 2006
………………………………………………………………………..
Dated this the 28th November , 2006
O R D E R