Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KUNHIRAMAN, S/O.NANDINI AMMA versus K.RAGHAVAN NAIR, S/O.KUMARN NAIR

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


KUNHIRAMAN, S/O.NANDINI AMMA v. K.RAGHAVAN NAIR, S/O.KUMARN NAIR - Crl Rev Pet No. 315 of 2007(E) [2007] RD-KL 1803 (23 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 315 of 2007(E)

1. KUNHIRAMAN, S/O.NANDINI AMMA,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. K.RAGHAVAN NAIR, S/O.KUMARN NAIR,
... Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

For Petitioner :SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN

For Respondent :SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

Dated :23/01/2007

O R D E R

K. HEMA, J.

Crl.R.P. No. 315 of 2007

Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2007.

ORDER

Revision Petitioner is the accused in C.C No. 91 of 1998 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasaragod. Firsts respondent is the complainant therein. Revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Magistrate's Court to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and to pay a fine of Rs. 46,000/-. In appeal filed by him, the conviction and sentence were confirmed by the Addl. Sessions Court. This revision arises from the said conviction and sentence.

2. At the time of hearing, both sides submitted that a petition as Crl.M.A.No.967 is filed for compounding the offence. It is also submitted by both sides that the matter is settled out of court amicably between the parties and the amount is also paid by the petitioner to the satisfaction of the first respondent-complainant. 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. In the result, the Revision Petitioner is acquitted of offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as offence is compounded. He is set at liberty forthwith. Crl. M.A.No.967 of 2007 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.