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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 58081

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
GOPAKUMAR J – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1354 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.M.RAJESH
For the Respondents: SRI.E.C.BINEESH-SR.PP

The court confirms the conviction under the NI Act but allows time for the petitioner to comply with the sentence.

Headnote:This criminal revision petition challenges the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as decided in Crl.Appeal No.150 of 2024 and S.T.No.659 of 2021. The petitioner seeks time to comply with the fine imposed without contesting the conviction. The court grants nine months for compliance, resulting in the dismissal of the petition.

Table of Content
1. challenging conviction under the ni act (Para 1 , 2)
2. court consideration for time to comply (Para 4)
3. final disposal of the revision petition (Para 5)

O R D E R

This criminal revision petition has been filed challenging the concurrent finding of conviction and sentence in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, 'the NI Act').

2. The petitioner is the accused. The 2nd respondent is the complainant. The 2nd respondent filed a private complaint against the petitioner under Section 142 of the NI Act as S.T.No.659 of 2021 before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class- I, Kollam (for short, 'the trial court'). After trial, the trial court found the petitioner guilty under Section 138 of the NI Act and he was convicted for the said offence. He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- to the complainant under Section 357 (3) of Cr.P.C., in default to suffer simple imprisonment for thirty days. The petitioner challenged the conviction and sentence of the trial court before the IIIrd Additional Sessions Court, Kollam (for short, 'the appellate court') in Crl.Appeal No.150 of 2024. The appellate court confirmed the conviction but reduced the substantive sentence. He was sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay the fine amount of Rs.3,00,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. This revision petition has been filed challenging the judgments of the trial court as well as the appellate court.

3. Heard both sides.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not challenge the conviction and sentence. The counsel further submits that the petitioner may be granted one year time to deposit the fine amount.

5. Having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is granted nine months' time to appear before the trial court to receive the imprisonment till the rising of the court and to deposit the fine amount.

The criminal revision petition is disposed of as above.

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 Back to top