Kerala High Court
V.Vijayakumar vs N.Vijayakumar on 25 October, 2014
Author: Alexander Thomas
Bench: Alexander Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
MONDAY THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/29TH KARTHIKA, 1939
,
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1116 of 2017 ()
--------------------------------
CRA.NO. 368/2014 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT - IV, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
ST.NO. 106/2011 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-IV,
NEDUMANGAD ,DATED 25-10-2014.
-----------------
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
V.VIJAYAKUMAR,
AGED 57,S/O. VELUKUTTY, MELEVILA VEEDU,
KURICHILAKODE MUNDELA,
VELLANADU P.O, NEDUMANGADU TALUK.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.V.PREMAKUMARAN NAIR
SRI.R.T.PRADEEP
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. N.VIJAYAKUMAR,
AGED 51 YEARS,
S/O.B. NARAYANAN NAIR, USHUS, KOKOTHAMANGALAM,
MUNDELA
VELLANADU P.O, NEDUMANGADU TALUK 695 541.
2. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.
R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 20-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
TS
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
----------------------------------------
Crl.R.P.No.1116 of 2017
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of November, 2017
ORDER
The revision petitioner is accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in S.T.No.106 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IV, Nedumangad, instituted on the basis of a complaint filed by the first respondent herein.
2. Exhibit P1 dishonoured cheque dated 21.2.2009 is for Rs.1,44,000/-. The trial court, as per the impugned judgment rendered on 25.10.2014, had convicted the petitioner for the abovesaid offence and had sentenced him to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay fine of Rs.1,87,000/- to the complainant and in default of payment thereof, the accused was ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner had preferred Criminal Appeal No.368 of 2014 before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The appellate court concerned (Court of the Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Thiruvananthapuram), as per the impugned judgment rendered on 29.5.2017, had dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and the sentence imposed by the trial court. It is challenging these concurrent verdicts of both the courts below Crl.R.P.No.1116/17 ::2::
that the petitioner has preferred the instant Criminal Revision Petition by taking recourse to the remedies conferred under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
3. Heard Sri.R.T.Pradeep, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned prosecutor appearing for R2/State. There is no appearance for R1/complainant in spite of due service of notice on that party.
4. The revision petition was admitted by this Court as per the order dated 20.9.2017 and the execution of the impugned sentence was ordered to be deferred for a period of six weeks and the parties were directed to be personally present before this Court at 10:15 A.M. on 13.10.2017 to ascertain whether the parties could be referred for mediation. Thereafter, the petitioner/accused and the first respondent/ complainant had personally appear before this Court on 13.10.2017 and had submitted that both of them are willing to be referred for mediatory efforts. Accordingly, both sides were referred for mediation before the Kerala State Mediation and Concilliation Centre, Ernakulam, attached to this Court. Now the Mediation Centre has furnished report dated 9.11.2017 stating that the matter has been settled and the memorandum of mediation agreement dated 9.11.2017 arrived at between the parties has also been furnished before this Court. Though notice has been duly served on R1/complainant, there is no appearance Crl.R.P.No.1116/17 ::3::
for that party.
5. The memorandum of mediation agreement dated 9.11.2017 signed by both the parties has made available by the Mediation Centre, which reads as follows :
b