Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

K.H.Latheef vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 13126 Ker

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 13126 Ker
Judgement Date : 15 December, 2023

Kerala High Court

K.H.Latheef vs State Of Kerala on 15 December, 2023

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
                     CRL.MC NO. 10906 OF 2023


PETITIONER:

             K.H.LATHEEF
             AGED 59 YEARS
             S/O.HASSAINAR, HOUSE NO.3/59,
             FORT KOCHI, KOCHI, PIN - 682001
             BY ADVS.
             T.MADHU
             C.R.SARADAMANI
             RENJISH S. MENON
             VRINDA T.S.

RESPONDENT:

             STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
             HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
             SRI.M.P.PRASANTH, PP




      THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   15.12.2023,    THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   PASSED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 CrlM.C..No.10906/2023

                                     2




                    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                     --------------------------------
                   Crl.M.C. No.10906 of 2023
              ----------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 15th day of December, 2023


                               ORDER

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed with following

prayers:

To direct the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's (Economic Offences) Court, Ernakulam to permit the petitioner to deposit the fine/compensation imposed as per Annexure-A3 judgment of this Honourable Court without insisting to produce order extending the time granted as Annexure A3 judgment of this Hon'ble Court, so as to secure the ends of justice.

2. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the

trial court as per Annexure-A1, in a proceedings under Section

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The conviction was

confirmed and the sentence was modified by the Additional

Sessions Court (Adhoc-I), Ernakulam as per Annexure-A2

order. The petitioner filed a revision before this Court. As per

Annexure-A3 order, the sentence was modified to pay a fine of

Rs.1,41,000/-, after confirming the conviction. This Court

granted ten months time to pay the fine amount. It is an

admitted fact that the petitioner was not able to pay the fine

amount within time. Now the petitioner want to pay the fine

amount. But the learned Magistrate is not accepting the same

saying that the time fixed by this Court is over. Hence this

criminal miscellaneous case.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. In the light of the principle laid down by this Court

in Subhash Sait v. Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance,

Palakkad and Another [2015 (4) KHC 741] and

K.G.Girish Kumar v. Muthoot Capital Service Pvt. Ltd.

[2006 KHC 1711], I think the stand taken by the Magistrate

is not correct. It will be better to extract the relevant portion

of the judgment in Subhash Sait's case (supra) :

"13. It is noticed that numerous applications are being filed before the High Court and the Sessions Court for enlargement of time for the deposit of fine

as the Trial Courts refuse to accept the fine / compensation after the period stipulated by the superior Courts, even after the decision of this Court in Gireesh v. Muthuoot Capital (supra). It is to be remembered that the default sentence is not punitive, but is only a measure to enforce payment of fine / compensation ordered by the Court. I make it clear that it is illegal, incorrect and unjust to refuse to permit the convict to deposit the fine amount after the date stipulated by the High Court / Sessions Court on the mere reason that no direction for extension has been granted by the High Court / Sessions Court."

In the light of the principle, I think the lower court is

bound to accept the fine amount even if the time fixed by this

Court in Annexure-A3 is over. Therefore, the petitioner is free

to deposit the fine amount as ordered in Annexure-A3 order

and if the amount is offered, the jurisdictional court will

accept the same and close the file.

With the above observation, this criminal miscellaneous

case is disposed of.

sd/-

                                               P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV                                                    JUDGE






                 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10906/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-A1       THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
                  6/11/2010 IN C.C.NO.406/2004 ON THE

FILES OF THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S (ECONOMIC OFFENCES) COURT; ERNAKULAM Annexure-A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29/7/2011 IN CRL.A.NO.709/2010 ON THE FILES OF THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL SESSION'S COURT (ADHOC-I) ERNAKULAM Annexure-A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21/1/2021 IN CRL.R.P.NO.1284/2012 ON THE FILES OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter