R. Thiraviyam Pillai vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 14090 Ker

CRL.MC NO. 2969 OF 2021               1

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
       WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1943
                          CRL.MC NO. 2969 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 07/05/2021 IN CRL.M.P.734/2021 IN CRA
            54/2021 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT-I,KOTTAYAM
NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED

            R. THIRAVIYAM PILLAI, AGED 64 YEARS,
            PROPRIETOR, UNITED AGENCIES, T.C.41-1065, KURIYATHY,
            MANACAUD PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695009,
            RESIDING AT T.C.54/836-1, SIVA GANGA, SREENAGAR, B-28,
            MADAMCODE, NEMOM PO,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695 020

            BY ADVS.
            J.R.PREM NAVAZ
            SUMEEN S.



NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE RESPONDENT

            STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH
            COURT OF KERALA, PIN-682 031



            P.P.SRI.RAMESH CHAND




     THIS   CRIMINAL   MISC.   CASE       HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
07.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 2969 OF 2021                   2

                                        ORDER

The condition incorporated directing deposit of 20%

of the cheque amount which comes to Rs.26,000/- for

suspension of sentence by the appellate court brought

under challenge on the reason that due to the ongoing

pandemic the petitioner could not collect the said

amount. The legal position was very much settled by the

Apex Court in Surender Singh Deswal and others v.

Virender Gandhi [(2019) 11 SCC 341]. It is in tune with

the said judgment, the First Appellate Court directed to

deposit 20% of the cheque amount so as to suspend the

sentence on the accused. It is made clear that the lower

court is at liberty to grant further time taking into

consideration of ongoing pandemic for complying with the

said order. There is no reason for exercising the

jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Hence, the Crl.M.C. is dismissed in limine.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE

MSP

ANNEXURE

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE A1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.05.2021 IN CRL.M.P.NO.734/2021 IN CRL.APPEAL NO.54/2021 PASSED BY THE ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE-I, KOTTAYAM

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:

NIL //TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE