Thomas Mathew vs Thomas @ Raju
2024 Latest Caselaw 32534 Ker

Kerala High Court

Thomas Mathew vs Thomas @ Raju on 8 November, 2024

CRL.A NO. 2110 OF 2007                        1                      2024:KER:84005



                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                       PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
     FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1946
                               CRL.A NO. 2110 OF 2007

         AGAINST    THE    ORDER/JUDGMENT          DATED   11.10.2007     IN    Crl.L.P.
NO.1022    OF   2007      OF   HIGH   COURT       OF   KERALA   ARISING   OUT    OF   THE
ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 04.04.2003 IN CC NO.1040 OF 2000 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II(MOBILE),KOTTAYAM
APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:

             THOMAS MATHEW
             MARATTUKULAM HOUSE
             RUBY NAGAR P.O., CHANGANACHERRY.


             BY ADV SRI.JOHN VARGHESE

RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED AND STATE:

     1       THOMAS @ RAJU
             MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,
             PUSHPAKANDAM P.O., NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

     2       STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
             PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,, ERNAKULAM.


             BY ADVS.
             Liji J Vadakkedom
             ATHUL V. VADAKKEDOM(K/003544/2022)


OTHER PRESENT:

             PP-SRI.M.C.ASHI

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.11.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.A NO. 2110 OF 2007                   2                     2024:KER:84005



                              JUDGMENT

This appeal is at the instance of the complainant in CC

No.1040 of 2000 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate

Court-II (Mobile), Kottayam, Changanacherry, challenging

acquittal of the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act (N.I.Act for short), vide judgment dated

4/4/2003.

Today when the appeal is taken up for consideration,

learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the matter is

settled out of court. So he is not prosecuting this matter any

further.

Hence, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/-

SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE ska