SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 31392

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
MARY JOSEPH, J
SATHIYAMMA RAJENDRAN
– Appellant
Versus

GIREESH KUMAR – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI.A.S.SHAMMY RAJ, SRI.S.JUSTUS, SRI.JUDIT SEBASTIAN, SRI.RENJITH GEORGE, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 13th day of July, 2022 This appeal is preferred against the judgment of II Additional Court of Sessions, Thiruvananthapuram (for short ‘the appellate court’) in Crl.Appeal No.32/2015.

2. The judgment was passed on 02.12.2015 and the 1st respondent herein was acquitted by the appellate court. The reasoning of the appellate court while acquitting the accused was that the source of income to advance the money was not proved by the complainant. The complaint was filed to launch the prosecution before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court For Trial of Forest Offences, Nedumangad (for short ‘the trial court’).

3. Before the trial court, both parties had adduced evidence. On the side of the prosecution, PW1 and PW2 were examined and Exts.P1 to P5 were marked. On the side of the accused, DW1 to DW3 were examined and Exts.D1 and D2 were marked. After appreciation of the above evidence, the trial court has found the accused guilty for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘NI Act’) and convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as fine and to underg

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top