Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

V.H.ABDULKHADER versus K.SHERAFUDEEN

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


V.H.ABDULKHADER v. K.SHERAFUDEEN - CRL A No. 299 of 1999 [2007] RD-KL 2901 (7 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRL A No. 299 of 1999()

1. V.H.ABDULKHADER
... Petitioner

Vs

1. K.SHERAFUDEEN
... Respondent

For Petitioner :M/S M.N.S.NAYAR & CO;

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY

Dated :07/02/2007

O R D E R

J.B.KOSHY, J.

Crl.Appeal No.299 OF 1999 Dated 7th February, 2007

JUDGMENT

The appellant filed a complaint alleging that cheque dated 30.1.1995 for a sum of Rs.37,000/= drawn by the first respondent/accused in favour of the complainant was dishonoured for insufficiency of funds. Therefore, after fulfilling statutory formalities he filed the complaint. According to the appellant/complainant, the cheque was issued for the cashew nuts purchased by the accused. During cross examination, complainant admitted that he was not having any accounts with him regarding the transaction and he was not keeping any accounts regarding his business. Even though he stated that he has got licence to do business of cashew nuts, that was also not produced. Further, the procurement or storage of cashew nuts by private parties was prohibited under the Kerala Raw Cashewnuts (Procurement and Distribution) Act, 1981 and such transactions were prohibited at the time of issuance of the cheque. In any event, the appellant/complainant was not maintaining any accounts and the court below found that the complainant failed to prove that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt. This is a possible view. When the court below takes a Crl.A.299/1999 2 possible view in acquitting the accused, appellate court cannot interfere in the same. Apart from the above, I note that notice was ordered as early as on 21.6.1999, but it is not served so far. On 1.11.2006 it was submitted that a week's time is required for curing the defects. No steps were also taken so far for curing the defects. Without service of notice to the accused, order of acquittal cannot be interfered. In any event, there is no merit in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed. J.B.KOSHY Judge tks


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.