Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
JOBIN VARGHESE – Appellant
Versus
MAHESH KUMAR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging conviction while accepting findings. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. argument for reduction of sentence and fine. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's final ruling on sentence adjustment. (Para 5) |
O R D E R
This revision petition has been filed challenging the conviction and the sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , 1881 (for short ‘the NI Act’).
2. The petitioner is the accused. He was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (N.I. Act Cases), Ernakulam, in C.C. No.3949/2015. He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,50,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. The appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Additional District and Sessions Court-VII, Ernakulam, as Crl.A. No.93/2020 was dismissed.
3. I have heard Smt.Dhanya Babu, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.E.C. Bineesh, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor and Sri.K.S. Sajeev Kumar, the learned counsel for the first respondent.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner does not challenge the conviction. Ho
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
