Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
Col V.G.G. Rao S/o Shri V.G. Naidu – Appellant
Versus
State Represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction and sentence under n.i. act (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments on notice and evidence (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's findings on evidence and notice compliance (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. dismissal of revision case due to abatement (Para 9 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. court's revisional jurisdiction and discretionary power (Para 11) |
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Revision Case is filed against the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ranga Reddy District, vide judgment, dated 29.02.2008 in Criminal Appeal No.66 of 2005 confirming the judgment of the learned X Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad in C.C.No.2244 of 2005, dated 10.11.2005, wherein the revision petitioner/accused was convicted for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘the N.I. Act, 1881’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of Rs.75,000/- to the complainant.
2. Heard Mr. V.S.M. Pritham Kanumuri, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the revision petitioner/accused and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State.
The death of an accused in a criminal revision case abates the sentence of imprisonment but does not affect the enforcement of ordered compensation, highlighting the distinct treatments of punishment....
It has been settled in law that the accused can either adduce independent evidence or rely on the evidence tendered by the complainant to rebut the presumptions.
The main legal point established is that the Appellate Court cannot enhance the sentence by ordering compensation in the absence of an appeal by the complainant.
The main legal point established is that the drawer of a cheque cannot take advantage of their own fault and must comply with the legal requirements under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Ac....
Dishonour of cheque – By making a higher demand in a notice sent under Section 138(b) of N.I. Act, would not by itself invalidate notice provided, details of claim towards additional amounts are spec....
Dishonour of cheque – Mere non-filing of any suit by complainant to recover amount due under promissory note does not entitle accused to claim order of acquittal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
