Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GURUPRASAD, S/O.MADHAVA PRABHU versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


GURUPRASAD, S/O.MADHAVA PRABHU v. STATE OF KERALA - Crl Rev Pet No. 3853 of 2006(B) [2007] RD-KL 843 (11 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 3853 of 2006(B)

1. GURUPRASAD, S/O.MADHAVA PRABHU,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

2. K.V.MICHAEL,

For Petitioner :SRI.S.NIRMAL KUMAR

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

Dated :11/01/2007

O R D E R

K. HEMA, J.

CRL. R.P. NO. 3853 OF 2006

Dated this the 11th day of January, 2007.

O R D E R

Revision petitioner is the accused in C.C. No. 1163 of 1998 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Cherthala. Second respondent is the complainant therein. Revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Magistrate's Court to undergo simple imprisonment for three months under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and to pay compensation of Rs. 75,000/- to PW1 under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. In appeal filed by him, the conviction and sentence were confirmed by the Additional 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. 13394 of 2006 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 involved is also paid by the petitioner to the second respondent. 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, 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. 13394 of 2006 and revision petition are allowed.

K. HEMA, JUDGE

smp


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.