Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
MUHAMMADALI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction under section 138 ni act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments heard from both sides. (Para 6) |
| 3. standards for revisional jurisdiction. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. conclusion to dismiss the revision petition. (Para 9 , 10) |
K.BABU, J.
--------------------------------------
Criminal.R.P No.1367 of 2025 ---------------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of January, 2026 O R D E R The challenge in this Crl.Revision Petition is to the judgment dated 19.03.2025 in Crl.Appeal No.24 of 2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Court-III, Manjeri, confirming the conviction and the sentence rendered by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Perinthalmanna, in judgment dated 22.02.2024 in S.T No.23 of 2019.
2. The revision petitioner is the sole accused. He has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘the NI Act’) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment till rising of the Court. He was also directed to pay compensation of Rs.9,83,400/- to the complainant.
3. Respondent No.2/complainant filed a complaint before the Trial Court alleging that the revision petitioner/accused executed Ext.P1 cheque for a sum of Rs.7,45,0
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
