Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

T.GOPIKRISHNAN versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


T.GOPIKRISHNAN v. STATE OF KERALA - CRL A No. 81 of 1999 [2006] RD-KL 1509 (1 November 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRL A No. 81 of 1999()

1. T.GOPIKRISHNAN
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH

For Respondent :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY

Dated :01/11/2006

O R D E R

J.B. KOSHY, J.

CRL.APPEAL No. 81 of 1999

Dated this the 1st day of November, 2006

Judgment This appeal is filed against the order of acquittal passed against the accused, three in number, for offences punishable under section 109 and 420 IPC read with section 34 IPC. Second accused is the wife of the first accused. Accused Nos.2 and 3 were jointly conducting a partnership business in the name 'Dhanya Film Distributors'. It is also stated that third accused is only an employee. It is the case of the complainant that after executing a promissory note, they issued a cheque in discharge of a debt due. But, the cheque was actually drawn from the account of the third accused which was returned for insufficiency of funds. Case filed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against accused No.1 was dismissed and he was acquitted. Accused No.1 has stated that he has not issued Ext.P2 cheque to the complainant. On the basis of very same Ext.P2 cheque, criminal case was filed against the first accused. Even after filing the complaint, the earlier case S.T.No.175 of 1993 was not withdrawn and was Crl.A.No.81/99 2 pending. First accused was acquitted in that case subsequently on merits. A civil case was also filed for realisation of money. The trial court also noticed that the very same contentions taken by the complainant was rejected in the earlier case S.T.No.175 of 1993. Further, civil case was also pending. In these circumstances, the court acquitted the accused especially taking note of section 300 (1) of Cr.P.C. I see no ground to interfere in the order of acquittal. Appeal dismissed. J.B.KOSHY

JUDGE

vaa

J.B. KOSHY, J.

CRL.APPEAL No.81/99 Judgment

Dated:1st November, 2006


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.