Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
V. G. Arun, J
C.NANDAKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. legal representation and arguments presented regarding fine exemption. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's observations on the applicability of prior case law and statutory mandates. (Para 3 , 4) |
ORDER The challenge in this Crl.M.C is against Annexure 10 order of the Sessions Court, Ernakulam exempting the 2nd respondent from paying 20% of the fine imposed by the trial court, while sentencing the 2nd respondent after guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act .
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, vide Annexure 8 order, the Appellate court had directed the 2nd respondent to pay 20% of the fine amount in the petition under Section 148 of the N.I. Act filed by the complainant in the same case. It is contended that Annexure 10 order is passed without considering the mandate of of the Negotiable Instruments Act or the direction laid down by the Apex Court in Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. [ 2023 (6) KHC 80 ].
3. I heard the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent also.
4. I am convinced that Annexure 10 order cannot be sustained since the order is diametrically opposed to the directi
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
