Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M.A.AHMED SHAFIULLAH, S/O.ABDUL LATIFF versus M/S.MANUALSONS TRADING COMPANY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M.A.AHMED SHAFIULLAH, S/O.ABDUL LATIFF v. M/S.MANUALSONS TRADING COMPANY - Crl Rev Pet No. 3940 of 2006(B) [2006] RD-KL 3343 (13 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 3940 of 2006(B)

1. M.A.AHMED SHAFIULLAH, S/O.ABDUL LATIFF,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. M/S.MANUALSONS TRADING COMPANY,
... Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

For Petitioner :SRI.S.NIRMAL KUMAR

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

Dated :13/12/2006

O R D E R

K. HEMA, J.

=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.= Crl.R.P. No.3940 of 2006 =.=.=.=.=.=.=.==.=..=.==.=.=.=.=.=.=.=. Dated this 13th day of December, 2006.

ORDER

This revision arises from the conviction and sentence passed against the revision petitioner under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The trial court found him guilty of the offence and convicted and sentenced him for the said offence. The appellate court also confirmed the conviction and sentence.

2. At the time of hearing, counsel for both sides submitted that petition as Crl.M.A.No.12826/2006 is filed for compounding the offence. On hearing both sides and on going through the averments in the petition, I am satisfied that this is a fit case to grant permission to compound the offence. It is submitted by both sides that amount is already paid by the petitioner to the respondent-complainant and the matter is settled out of court amicably between the parties. Hence, permission is granted to compound the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

3. It is submitted by both sides that Rs.15,000/- was deposited by the revision petitioner before the court below and the said amount can be ordered to be released to the complainant-1strespondent. Crl.R.P.3940/06 2 Hence, the court below is directed to release Rs.15,000/- in deposit to the complainant-first respondent. In the result, the Revision Petitioner is acquitted of offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as compounded. He is set at liberty forthwith. Crl. M.A.No.12826/2006 and Revision Petition are allowed.

Krs. K. HEMA, JUDGE.


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.