Mubarak Ali vs Bindu K.V
2024 Latest Caselaw 13689 Ker

Kerala High Court

Mubarak Ali vs Bindu K.V on 27 May, 2024

Author: P.Somarajan

Bench: P.Somarajan

CRL.REV.PET NO. 542 OF 2024

                                       1


                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
            MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 6TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                          CRL.REV.PET NO. 542 OF 2024
     AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.01.2024 IN CRA NO.133 OF 2020 OF
          ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)-II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.10.2020 IN CC NO.3012 OF 2015 OF SPECIAL
COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS FOR TRIAL OF CASES U/S.138
                     NI ACT(JMFC XI), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

              MUBARAK ALI,
              AGED 65 YEARS,
              RAIZA COTTAGE, VETTUROAD, KAZHAKUTTOM,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695582
              BY ADVS.
              PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR
              AKASH S.
              GIRISH KUMAR M S


RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

      1       BINDU K.V
              WIFE OF S. SURESH KUMAR (DIED), 'USHUS', AZHOOR, AZHOOR
              VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695304
      2       STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
              HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031


              PP SMT NIMA JACOB


      THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.REV.PET NO. 542 OF 2024

                                              2


                                            ORDER

It is against the judgment of conviction and

order of sentence in a prosecution under Section 138

of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the accused came

up. Both the trial court and the first appellate

court found the accused guilty of the said offence

based on the oral testimony of complainant and the

documentary evidence. No evidence worth the name was

adduced by the accused. The accused did not even

mount on the box to give any direct evidence. In

fact, there is no much dispute pertaining to the

cheque leaf which belonged to the account maintained

by the accused and the signature affixed as that of

him. Necessarily, the concurrent judgment of

conviction rendered by both the courts below deserve

no interference. The sentence awarded reflects a

proper balance as it is a simple imprisonment till

rising of court and fine amount for the amount

covered by the cheque.

2. Having regard to the submission made by the CRL.REV.PET NO. 542 OF 2024

learned counsel for the petitioner, four months time

is granted to the petitioner to receive the sentence.

Till that time, no coercive steps shall be initiated

against the petitioner. The petitioner/accused shall

appear before the court within that time to receive

the sentence.

The Criminal Revision Petition will stand

dismissed accordingly.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE msp