Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
RENJAN K JOHN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner’s health and financial status indicate grounds for suspension. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. discretion of appellate courts in sanctions for financial obligations. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. suspension of sentence granted based on exceptional circumstances. (Para 8) |
ORDER
Aggrieved by Annexure-A1 judgment passed by the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Punalur (Trial court) in C.C.No.47/2019, convicting and sentencing the petitioner for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short “the Act”), the petitioner has preferred Crl.A.No.83/2025 before the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Punalur (Appellate court). Along with the appeal, the petitioner had also filed Annexures-A2 and A3 applications, to suspend the substantive sentence and payment of the statutory fine amount, and to waive deposit of the fine amount, respectively. However, by Annexures-A4 and A5 orders, the Appellate court has dismissed the applications and has ordered the petitioner to deposit 20% of the fine amount within 60 days. Annexures-A4 and A5 orders are palpably wrong and unreasonable.
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
