Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

HAMSA, S/O. MUHAMMED versus STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


HAMSA, S/O. MUHAMMED v. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE - Crl MC No. 2523 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 15193 (8 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2523 of 2007()

1. HAMSA, S/O. MUHAMMED,
... Petitioner

2. MUSTHAFA, S/O. HAMSA,

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.SUNNY MATHEW

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :08/08/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J.

Crl.M.C.No.2523 of 2007

Dated this the 8th day of August 2007

O R D E R

The petitioners have been found guilty, convicted and sentenced in a prosecution under Section 324 read with 34 I.P.C. The verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence have now become final. Another Bench of this court in revision has modified the sentence into one of fine of Rs.5,000/- each. There was a further direction that the fine amount must be deposited in the court below positively within one month from the date of the order in revision. It was further observed that in case of failure, the trial court shall take steps to execute the sentence in default of payment of fine as against the petitioners.

2. The petitioners did not remit the amount within the period of one month. They are now willing to pay the amount but they apprehend that in view of the specific directions of this court in revision, the learned Magistrate might still send them to prison to undergo the default sentence for they have not paid the amount within the stipulated period of time.

3. The petitioners now face only a sentence of fine. The operative portion of the order in revision which I extract belowmust be read and understood reasonably. Crl.M.C.No.2523/07. 2

"In the result, I confirm the conviction of the petitioners by the courts below for offence under Section 324 I.P.C read with Section 34 thereof. All the same, the sentence is modified to one of fine of Rupees five thousand each. The fine amount shall be deposited in the court below positively within one month from today. In case of failure, the trial court shall take steps to implement the sentence in default of payment fine as against the petitioners"

4. It can only mean that this court has granted the petitioners time of one month for making the payment. Till then the sentence should not be executed. Even thereafter, if the fine amount is paid, there can be no question of any default sentence being imposed against the petitioners. The position has been made crystal clear in the decision in Girish v. Muthoot Capital Service (P) Ltd. [2007(1) KLT 16]. No further directions appear to be necessary.

5. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is in these circumstances dismissed with the above observations. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge Crl.M.C.No.2523/07. 3 Crl.M.C.No.2523/07. 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007


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.