Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THOMAS V.JOHN @ ROY versus P.C. JOSEPH

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


THOMAS V.JOHN @ ROY v. P.C. JOSEPH - Crl Rev Pet No. 4072 of 2006 [2006] RD-KL 1717 (21 November 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 4072 of 2006()

1. THOMAS V.JOHN @ ROY
... Petitioner

Vs

1. P.C.JOSEPH
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.P.VINODKUMAR

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :21/11/2006

O R D E R

K.T.SANKARAN, J

Crl. R.P. No. 4072 OF 2006

Dated this the 21st day of November, 2006

ORDER

The petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The petitioner challenged the conviction and sentence in Crl.A.No.20/2002 on the file of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge II, Mavelikara. The appellate court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and the first respondent/complainant submitted that the sentence can be modified directing the petitioner to pay compensation of Rs.90,000/-. Accordingly, the Crl.R.P. is partly allowed. The conviction is confirmed. The sentence imposed by the courts below is modified and reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court. The petitioner shall pay a compensation of Rs.90,000/- 2 to the first respondent/complainant under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in default of payment of compensation, the petitioner/accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. The petitioner/accused is granted two months time to pay the compensation. It is agreed by the parties that the compensation if paid by the revision petitioner, the same shall be adjusted towards the decree amount in O.S. No.467 of 1998 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Chengannur. Crl.R.P. is partly allowed as indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN,

JUDGE

csl 3 Crl.M.A.No. 11271/2006 This is an application to condone the delay of 363 days in filing the revision. The first respondent entered appearance. It is submitted by the counsel for the revision petitioner, can be disposed of directing the petitioner/accused to pay compensation under Section 357(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. In this circumstances, the delay is condoned. Number the Crl. R.P. 4


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.