Aravindakshan M.P vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 14274 Ker

Kerala High Court

Aravindakshan M.P vs State Of Kerala on 29 May, 2024

Author: P.Somarajan

Bench: P.Somarajan

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
     WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 8TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                   CRL.REV.PET NO. 558 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 29.04.2024 IN CRA NO.211 OF 2019
          OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT - IV, THALASSERY
   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2019 IN STC NO.4 OF 2016 OF
   JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS- II(MUNSIFF), TALIPARAMBA
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

          ARAVINDAKSHAN M.P, AGED 63 YEARS,
          S/O KUNJIRAMAN NAMBIAR, MAVILE VEETIL (H),
          PARAKADI, KOYYAM P.O, KARIMBAM (VIA),
          TALIPARAMBA TALUK,
          KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670142

          BY ADVS.
          B.MUHAMMED SHAHEEL
          R.N.SANDEEP
          KEERTHI VIJAYAN
          JYOTHI R. NAIR


RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS/STATE COMPLAINANT:

    1     STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
    2     P.S.SUNNY, AGED 52 YEARS,
          S/O SAVIER, PALLINERAYIKKAL HOUSE,
          SREEKANDAPURAM, KOTTOOR P.O,
          TALIPARAMBA TALUK,
          KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670631


          PP SRI SANGEETHARAJ N R


     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 29.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.REV.PET NO. 558 OF 2024

                                         2


                                      ORDER

When the matter came up for hearing, the learned

counsel for the revision petitioner fairly submitted

that the finding of guilt of accused and conviction

rendered are resting on the oral testimony of PW1,

complainant, and the documentary evidence adduced.

Both the trial court and the first appellate court

found that the accused is guilty of the offence

punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, after satisfying the due execution

of the cheque in question and compliance of mandate

under that section. No contra evidence was adduced

to show or rebut the presumption available under

Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. As

such, it is fairly submitted that there is no reason

for interfering with the finding of guilt of accused

and the judgment of conviction.

2. The sentence awarded stood confirmed and

modified by the first appellate court is the bare

minimum, that is, till rising of court and the cheque CRL.REV.PET NO. 558 OF 2024

amount by way of fine. Hence, it deserves no

interference. At this juncture, the learned counsel

for the revision petitioner pressed for some more

time to pay the fine amount and to receive the

substantive sentence (till rising of court). Three

months time is granted from today to the accused to

appear before the trial court to receive the

sentence. Till that time, no coercive steps shall be

initiated against the revision petitioner.

The Criminal Revision Petition will stand

dismissed accordingly with the abovesaid direction.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE msp