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 0, Cited by 3]

Kerala High Court

In Crl.Appeal vs State Of Kerala on 2 June, 2003

       

  

  

 
 
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                       PRESENT :

           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

      FRIDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2011 / 28TH SRAVANA 1933

                   CRL.A.No. 1062 of 2003()
                   ------------------------
   AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN CRLP.42/2003 Dated 02/06/2003
   CC.757/2001 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOCHI - 5.
                   ....................


   APPELLANT(S): IN CRL.APPEAL,PETITIONER IN CRL.L.P.
                           COMPLAINANT IN CC:
   ---------------------------------------------------------

               MRS. ACCAMMA EAPEN,
               PROPRIETRIX, HINTER LAND CHITS,
               REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,
               V.EAPEN MATHAI, 76 GIRI NAGAR, KOCHI - 20.

             BY ADV. SRI.MATHAI EAPPEN VETTATH


   RESPONDENT(S): IN APPEAL, RESPONDENTS IN CRL.L.P. ACCUSED IN CC:
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1.         STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.

    2.         TOMY T.F., S/O.FRANCIS,
               THAIKKADAN HOUSE, EROOR, TRIPUNITHURA.


       R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. ALEX M.THOMBRA


   THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
   ON 19/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
   THE FOLLOWING:

Kss


                    N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

---------------------------------------------------- Crl.A.No.1062 of 2003

---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of August, 2011 Judgment This appeal was filed in the year 2003 challenging the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate in a complaint filed by the appellant herein alleging offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. The appellant took no steps to effect notice on the first respondent/accused. It is noted by the Registry that there was no representation. Hence it was posted before the court. When the case was taken up in the morning, no representation was made on behalf of the appellant. It was again taken up in the afternoon also. No representation. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

srd