Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

E.Vijayachandran vs Sudhakaran on 21 December, 2017

Author: P.Ubaid

Bench: P.Ubaid

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                        PRESENT:

                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

    THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939

                           Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 4634 of 2006 ( )
                             ---------------------------------
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRA 125/2004 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-
                                      II, MANJERI

    AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 673/1995 of J.M.F.C.,PARAPPANANGADI

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED;:
-----------------------------------------

                E.VIJAYACHANDRAN
               S/O.PADMANABHAN NAIR, `RAMA NILAYAM',
                TIRURANGADI P.O., CHEMMADU, MALAPPURAM.


                BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER


RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
------------------------------------------------------------

       1.      SUDHAKARAN
                KUMMILI VEED, ARIYALOOR AMSOM, DESOM,
                TIRUR TALUK.

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


                R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN
                R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SREEJA.V.


         THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
21-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 4634 of 2006

                               APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:


ANNEXURE-A1:        MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DT.27.11.2006 ISSUED BY ASST.
SURGEON, GOVT. T.H.Q. HOSPITAL, TIRURANGADI IN FAVOUR OF THE
PETITIONER




                              /True copy/




                                          P.S to Judge



                            P.UBAID, J.
                         ~~~~~~~~~~
                    Crl.R.P No.4634 of 2006
                        ~~~~~~~~~~~
             Dated this the 21st December, 2017


                            O R D E R

The revision petitioner herein is the accused in C.C 673/1995 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Parappanangadi. He challenges the conviction and sentence against him under Sections 420 and 468 IPC. The conviction was confirmed in appeal by the Court of Session, Manjeri

2. On a perusal of the materials, I find that practically the issue is concerning the bouncing of a cheque. The complainant brought complaint alleging the I.P.C offences, and cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate under Sections 420 and 468 I.P.C. Anyway, the trial went on, and the case ended in conviction.

3. Pending the revision proceedings, the parties came to terms amicably out of court, and thus settled the whole dispute. They were granted permission to compound the offence under Section 420 I.P.C on Crl M.A 6909/2017. The composition made by the parties as Crl.R.P No.4634 of 2006 2 regards the offence under Section 420 I.P.C was accepted and recorded on Crl.M.A 6908/2017. Thus the offence under Section 420 I.P.C stands compounded under the law, with the permission of the court. Now what remains is the conviction under Section 468 I.P.C.

4. On a perusal of the entire materials, and on hearing both sides,I find that there is no definite and satisfactory material to sustain the conviction under Section 468 I.P.C. Forgery punishable under Section 468 I.P.C must be forgery made with intend to defraud fraud or with intend to cheat. The main offence of cheating stands settled and compounded. Anyway, I find on a perusal of the entire materials that the evidence adduced by the complainant is not satisfactory at all to prove the offence of forgery beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, I find that as regards the offence under Section 468 I.P.C, the accused is entitled for acquittal on merits.

In the result, this revision petition is disposed of, as follows:

a. The conviction and sentence against the revision Crl.R.P No.4634 of 2006 3 petitioner under Section 468 I.P.C in C.C 673/1995 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Parappanangadi, confirmed in appeal by the Court of Session, Manjeri will stand set aside on the finding that he is not guilty and he is acquitted under Section 386 (b) (i) Cr.P.C.
b. The composition made by the parties as regards the offence under Section 420 I.P.C is accepted.
c. The conviction and sentence against the revision petitioner under Section 420 I.P.C will stand set aside in terms of composition, and the revision petitioner will stand released from prosecution on the benefit of acquittal under Section 320 (8) Cr.P.C, as regards the offence under Section 420 I.P.C.

Sd/-

P.UBAID JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.S to Judge