Soniya Mathew vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 627 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

    THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 17TH POUSHA, 1942

                      Crl.Rev.Pet.No.9 OF 2021

  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRA 289/2020 DATED 11-12-2020 OF
            DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM

  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 218/2009 DATED 07-10-2014 OF
      JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - II, PERUMBAVOOR


REVISION PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/COUNTER PETITIONERS/SURETIES:

      1      SONIYA MATHEW
             AGED 52 YEARS
             W/O. MATHEW, RESIDING AT VATTOLIL HOUSE,
             PARATHODU VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK,
             IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685553

      2      LISSY,
             AGED 48 YEARS
             W/O. BABU JOSEPH, RESIDING AT VATTOLIL HOUSE,
             PARATHODU VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK,
             IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685553

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.C.S.MANU
             SRI.ANOOP JOSEPH

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTAND THE STATE:

             STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
             KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031


OTHER PRESENT:

             SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK

     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CR.REV.PET.NO.9 OF 2021
                                        2




                                 O R D E R

Dated this the 7th day of January 2021

The Revision Petitioners had stood

surety for the accused in C.C.No.218/2009 of

the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-

II, Perumbavoor.

2. The case pertained to an offence

under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act. After being enlarged on

bail, the accused failed to appear before

the court, which resulted in Section 446

proceedings being issued against the

petitioners. The proceedings culminated in

the order dated 07.10.2014, by which the

petitioners were imposed with penalty of

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) each.

Aggrieved, the petitioners preferred appeal

under Section 449 before the Sessions Court CR.REV.PET.NO.9 OF 2021

and as per the judgment dated 11.12.2020,

the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the

imposition of penalty but reduced the amount

to Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only)

each. Aggrieved, the petitioners are in

revision.

3. The solitary contention urged by

the learned Counsel for the petitioners is

that, after the petitioners were imposed

with penalty, the accused in the case had

surrendered before the Jurisdictional Court,

deposited a fine of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five

Thousand Only)and had paid the compensation

amount to the complainant in terms of the

judgment of the court. An order dated

22.03.2016 of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate's Court-II, Perumbavoor, in

C.C.No.218/2019 is produced, which shows

that the court has recorded the sentence to

have been executed and the case closed. CR.REV.PET.NO.9 OF 2021

Taking into consideration the subsequent

events, the imposition of penalty is

confirmed and the amount of penalty is

reduced to Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand

Only) each.

This Criminal Revision Petition is

disposed of accordingly.

Sd/ V.G.ARUN JUDGE NB