Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
PRADEEP – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner convicted under the negotiable instruments act. (Para 1) |
| 2. counsel for both parties confirm settlement. (Para 2) |
| 3. court allows compounding of the matter. (Para 3) |
ORDER
The above Criminal Revision Petition is filed against the conviction and sentence imposed as per the impugned judgment. The trial court convicted and sentenced the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of `3,30,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs thirty thousand only). The appeal filed filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4
2025:KER:37055
3. Counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that the matter is settled and the 2nd respondent filed an application stating that he has no objection in setting aside the impugned judgment and he is not interested to proceed with the case. If that be the case, the compounding petition can be allowed and the impugned judgment can be set aside.
Therefor
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
