Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

V. VENUGOPAL versus C.K. SHARAFUDHEEN

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


V. VENUGOPAL v. C.K. SHARAFUDHEEN - Crl Rev Pet No. 2980 of 2006 [2006] RD-KL 626 (29 August 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 2980 of 2006()

1. V.VENUGOPAL, AGED YEARS,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. C.K.SHARAFUDHEEN, AGED YEARS,
... Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY

For Petitioner :SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :29/08/2006

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.R.P.No. 2980 of 2006
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 29th day of August, 2006

O R D E R

This revision petition is directed against a concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

2. The cheque is for an amount of Rs. 18,000/- The signature in the cheque is not disputed. The short contention raised by the petitioner is that the cheque was not issued to the complainant, but to his brother; not for the discharge of any legally enforcible debt/liability, but as security. The complainant examined himself as PW1 and the Manager of the drawee bank as PW2. Exts.P1 to P6 were marked. A witness was examined on the side of the accused. He is the brother of the complainant, to whom the cheque was allegedly handed over. He did not support the defence case.

3. The courts below, in these circumstances, concurrently Crl.R.P.No. 2980 of 2006 2 came to the conclusion that the complainant has succeeded in establishing all ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The appellate court indulgently modified the sentence and the petitioner now faces a sentence of imprisonment till rising of court and to pay the actual cheque amount of Rs.18,000/- as compensation and in default to undergo S.I. for a period of one month.

4. Called upon to explain the nature of challenge which the petitioner wants to mount against the impugned concurrent judgments, the learned counsel for the petitioner only prays that the petitioner may be granted some further time for making the payment of compensation and thus avoid the default sentence. No other contentions are raised. Having gone through the impugned judgments and after discussions at the Bar, I reckon that as an informed and fair stand taken by the petitioner. I am satisfied that the verdict of guilty and conviction are absolutely justified and unexceptionable. The sentence imposed is also absolutely reasonable and does not call for interference at all.

5. However it can be directed that the petitioner shall appear before the trial court on 31.10.2006 to serve the impugned sentence. Crl.R.P.No. 2980 of 2006 3 Till then the sentence shall not be executed. If the petitioner does not so appear, the learned Magistrate shall thereafter take necessary steps to execute the impugned sentence.

6. This revision petition is hence dismissed with the above observations/directions. (R. BASANT) Judge tm


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.