Jayachandran K vs Sree Gurvayoorappan Chit Funds ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 7664 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

    THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                   Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1423 OF 2018

  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRA 326/2017 DATED 21-04-2018 OF
             ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT KOZHIKODE- II

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 532/2013 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
                     OF FIRST CLASS, PERAMBRA


REVISION PETITIONER/S/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

             JAYACHANDRAN K.
             AGED 56 YEARS
             S/O.LATE NARAYANAN NAIR, KIZHAKKAYIL (H),
             PERAMBRA (P.O.), MENHHANNYAM VILLAGE,
             KOYILANDY TALUK,
             KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

             BY ADVS.
             SANTHARAM.P
             SMT.REKHA ARAVIND
             SRI.K.A.MOHAMED HARIS
             SRI.PAUL P. ABRAHAM

RESPONDENT/S/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

      1      SREE GURVAYOORAPPAN CHIT FUNDS PVT. LTD.
             REP. BY SREENIVASAN V.V.,
             AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. KORAN,
             COLLECTION OFFICE SREE GURUVAYOORAPPAN CHIT FUNDS
             PVT. LTD., SAI LAKSHMI BUILDING,
             PAYYOLI ROAD, PERAMBRA (P.O.),
             MENHANNYAM VILLAGE, KOYILANDY TALUK,
             KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 673105.

      2      THE STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
             ERNAKULAM-682031.

             R1 BY ADV. P.V.MIDHUN
             R1 BY ADV. E.HARIDAS
             SMT. M. K. PUSHPALATHA,SR.PP

     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
04.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1423 OF 2018

                              2




                       O R D E R

The revision petitioner was convicted and

sentenced by the courts below under Section 138 of

the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the N.I.

Act').

2. Heard.

3. The courts below correctly appreciated the

oral and documentary evidence and concurrently

found that the revision petitioner executed Ext.P2

cheque as contemplated under Section 138 of the

N.I.Act and committed the offence under Section 138 of

the N.I. Act. No material has been brought to the

notice of this court to indicate that the appreciation of

evidence or the concurrent finding of conviction under Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1423 OF 2018

Section 138 of the N.I.Act by the courts below was

perverse or incorrect. In the said circumstances, the

concurrent finding of conviction by the courts below

under Section 138 of the N.I.Act, does not warrant any

interference by this court. The sentence awarded by

the appellate court also does not warrant any

interference by this Court.

In the result, this Criminal Revision Petition

stands dismissed.

However, the revision petitioner is granted ten

months to pay the fine/compensation as requested by

the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner.

Needless to state that if the revision petitioner

had already deposited any amount before the trial Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1423 OF 2018

court pursuant to the direction of this court, the said

amount shall be released to the complainant as part of

the compensation.

Sd/-

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR JUDGE RK/04.03.2021