Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BIJU M. JOHNY, S/O.JOHNY versus RAJAN, S/O.SUNDARAN, AGED 44 YEARS

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


BIJU M. JOHNY, S/O.JOHNY v. RAJAN, S/O.SUNDARAN, AGED 44 YEARS - Crl L P No. 702 of 2006 [2007] RD-KL 4848 (7 March 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl L P No. 702 of 2006()

1. BIJU M. JOHNY, S/O.JOHNY,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. RAJAN, S/O.SUNDARAN, AGED 44 YEARS,
... Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

For Petitioner :SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.THANKAPPAN

Dated :07/03/2007

O R D E R

K.THANKAPPAN, J.

CRL. L.P. NO. 702 OF 2006

Dated this the 7th day of March, 2007

O R D E R

This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment in C.C. No.651 of 2004 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court III, Punalur.

2. The case of the petitioner - complainant was that the first respondent - accused had borrowed a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from him and issued Ext.P1 cheque towards discharge of the said liability which when presented to the bank for encashment was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds in the account of the first respondent, the signatory of the cheque. After complying with the statutory provisions, the petitioner filed the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. To prove the case against the first respondent, the petitioner himself was examined as PW.1 and Exts.P1 to P7 were produced. On the side of the defence, the first respondent was examined as DW.1 and Ext.D1 was produced. When questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the first CRL.L.P.NO.702/2006 2 respondent denied having issued any cheque in favour of the complainant and stated that he had transactions with the father of the complainant in whose favour he had issued a cheque which, according to him, was misused by the petitioner - complainant.

3. After considering the entire evidence, the court below found that the petitioner - complainant failed to prove that Ext.P1 cheque was issued in his favour by the first respondent towards discharge of any liability and acquitted the first respondent - accused. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the finding entered by the court below requires no interference. The Crl. Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed.

(K.THANKAPPAN, JUDGE)

sp/ CRL.L.P.NO.702/2006 3


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.