Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 19322
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
V.V.MUSTHAFA – Appellant
Versus
JOSHY ABRABAM – Respondent
OP(Crl.)/470/2022
CIBI THOMAS
A court may grant extensions for compliance with fine payments under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act based on a party's financial hardships and health concerns.
Headnote:
NegotiableInstrument - Accused - Negotiable Instrument Act - Section 138 - Court allowed extension for fine deposit due to financial and health difficulties.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act for failing to honor a negotiable instrument. He appealed to the Sessions Court, which suspended the sentence pending a 20% fine deposit, but the petitioner struggled to meet this requirement due to financial challenges.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted more time to deposit the fine amount due to his reported financial difficulties and health issues.
Ratio Decidendi: The court recognized the need for compassion in the enforcement of the law, permitting an extension for compliance based on the petitioner's readiness to pay and his extenuating circumstances.
Final Decision: The petitioner is allowed an additional month to deposit the fine amount.
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is the accused in S.T.C. No. 37 of 2017 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thaliparamba.
2. The prosecution is initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act . The Trial Court convicted the petitioner and sentenced him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act . Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sessions Court, Thalassery. The Sessions Court admitted the appeal and suspended the sentence on condition that, the petitioner will deposit 20% of fine amount within a period of two months from 15.02.2022. It is the case of the petitioner that he was not able to deposit the amount within the time as directed in Ext.P2 order. The petitioner seeks time to deposit the amount. The petitioner is ready to deposit the amount at any time and he also stated that, he was not able to deposit the amount within the time prescribed in Ext. P2 order because of some financial difÏculty and physical aliments.
3. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the light of the fact that, the petitioner is ready to deposit the amount as directed in Ext.P2 order, notice to 1st respondent is dispensed with. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I think, the time can be allowed to deposit the amount before the trial court. Therefore, this Original Petition (Crl) is disposed of allowing the petitioner to deposit the fine amount as directed in Ext.P2 order, within a period of one month from today.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE
APPENDIX OF OP(CRL.) 470/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN STC NO.
37/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -II, TALIPARAMBA.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2022 IN CRL. M.P. NO. 469/2022 IN CRL. APPEAL NO.
24/2022 OF THE SESSIONS COURT THALASSERY EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMERY ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM METROMED INTERNATIONAL CARDIAC CENTRE PVT. LTD, KOZHIKODE RELATING TO HIS TREATMENT FOR CARDIAC DISEASE.
// True Copy // PA To Judge
