Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.K. PURUSHOTHAMAN versus K.V. ABRAHAM

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.K. PURUSHOTHAMAN v. K.V. ABRAHAM - Crl Rev Pet No. 564 of 2005(A) [2006] RD-KL 1775 (23 November 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 564 of 2005(A)

1. K.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN, S/O. KUMARAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. K.V.ABRAHAM, S/O. VARKEY,
... Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

For Petitioner :SRI.ANIL GEORGE

For Respondent :SRI.C.P.UDAYABHANU

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

Dated :23/11/2006

O R D E R

K.T.SANKARAN, J

Crl. R.P. No.564 of 2005

Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2006

O RDER Crl.R.P. is filed challenging the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 45 days. There was also a direction that the fine amount, if realised, would be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On appeal by the accused, the appellate court allowed the appeal in part and while confirming the conviction, the sentence of imprisonment was altered and limited to imprisonment till the rising of the court, and a sum of Rs.40,000/- was awarded as compensation with a default sentence of imprisonment for three months.

2. Crl.M.A.No.11670/2006 filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act signed by the complainant and the accused and their counsel, stating that the matter is settled CRRP 564/2005 2 between the parties. That application was allowed. It is stated therein that Rs.3,000/- was deposited on 4.4.2005 and Rs.10,000/- was deposited on 5.2.2005 by the Revision petitioner/accused before the trial court and that those amounts may be directed to be released in favour of the complainant. Accordingly, the Crl.R.P. is allowed. The conviction and sentence against the petitioner are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted under Section 320(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The trial court shall release to the complainant the amount of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.10,000/- deposited by the accused. K.T.SANKARAN,

JUDGE

csl CRRP 564/2005 2

K.T.SANKARAN, J

Crl.M.A.No. 11670 of 2006 in Crl. R.P. No.564 of 2005

Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2006

O RDER This is an application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act seeking leave to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Act. The application is supported by the affidavit sworn to by the revision petitioner and the application is signed by the revision petitioner/accused and the first respondent/complainant. It is stated that the matter is settled between the parties. It is also stated that Rs.3,000/- was deposited on 4.4.2005 and Rs.10,000/- was deposited on 5.2.2005 by the revision petitioner/accused before the trial court and that those amounts may be directed to be released in favour of the first respondent/complainant. The application is allowed. K.T.SANKARAN, CRRP 564/2005 2

JUDGE

csl

? IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

+Crl Rev Pet No. 565 of 2005() #1. V.G.RAJAN S/O. KUMARAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

$1. K.V.ABRAHAM S/O. VARKEY,
... Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY

! For Petitioner :SRI.ANIL GEORGE

For Respondent :SRI.C.P.UDAYABHANU

*Coram

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

% Dated :23/11/2006

: O R D E R

K.T.SANKARAN, J

Crl. R.P. No.565 of 2005

Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2006

O RDER Crl.R.P. is filed challenging the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court sentenced the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 45 days. There was also a direction that the fine amount, if realised, would be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On appeal by the accused, the appellate court allowed the appeal in part and while confirming the conviction, the sentence of imprisonment was altered and limited to imprisonment till the rising of the court and a sum of Rs.40,000/- was awarded as compensation with a default sentence of imprisonment for three months.

2. Crl.M.A.No.11669/2006 was filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the complainant and the accused. The application is supported by the affidavit of the CRRP565/2005 2 Revision Petitioner/accused, wherein it is stated that the amount of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.10,000/- deposited by him is agreed to be withdrawn by the complainant. Accordingly the Crl.R.P. is allowed. The conviction and sentence against the petitioner are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted under Section 320(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The trial court shall release to the complainant the amount of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.10,000/- deposited by the accused. K.T.SANKARAN,

JUDGE

csl CRRP565/2005 3

K.T.SANKARAN, J

Crl.M.A.No. 11669 of 2006 in Crl. R.P. No.565 of 2005

Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2006

O RDER This is an application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act seeking leave to compound the offence under Section 138 of the Act. The application is supported by the affidavit sworn to by the revision petitioner and the application is signed by the revision petitioner/accused and the first respondent/complainant. It is stated that the matter is settled between the parties. It is also stated that Rs.3,000/- was deposited on 4.4.2005 and Rs.10,000/- was deposited on 5.2.2005 by the revision petitioner/accused before the trial court and that those amounts may be directed to be released in favour of the first respondent/complainant. The application is allowed. CRRP565/2005 4 K.T.SANKARAN,

JUDGE

csl


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.