High Court Kerala High Court

T.K.Rajeev vs T.L.Tony on 4 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
T.K.Rajeev vs T.L.Tony on 4 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 3872 of 2006(D)


1. T.K.RAJEEV, S/O. THAZHATH KUTTAPPAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. T.L.TONY, S/O. THEKKUMPPURAM LONAPPAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.K.SAJEEV

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :04/01/2008

 O R D E R
                             R. BASANT, J.
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                    Crl.R.P.No. 3872 of 2006
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
              Dated this the 4th day of January, 2008

                                O R D E R

This revision petition is directed against the concurrent

verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution under

Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Both the petitioner/accused and the

respondent/complainant have entered appearance before the

Court. It is now submitted that the accused has been arrested.

He faces the sentence of imprisonment till rising of Court. There

is a further direction that he must pay an amount of Rs.62,000/-

as compensation and in default to undergo S.I. for a period of

two months.

2. The accused is now in custody, it is submitted at the

Bar. It is further submitted that an amount of Rs.62,000/- has

been paid by the accused to the complainant and the complainant

has received the same in full satisfaction.

3. It is for the complainant to report that fact to the learned

Magistrate. If it is reported to the learned Magistrate by the

Crl.R.P.No. 3872 of 2006
2

complainant and the learned Magistrate is satisfied about that

submission that an amount of Rs.62,000/- has already been paid, the

learned Magistrate shall forthwith direct release of the accused from

custody as he is not liable to undergo the default sentence thereafter.

Insistence on deposit of compensation amount need not be made as the

direction is only to pay the amount to the complainant.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner accepts that this

revision petition can be dismissed with the above observations.

Request is accepted and this revision petition is dismissed.

5. Hand over the order.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm