Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
BINOJ – Appellant
Versus
BRIGHT TRADERS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction under section 138 of the ni act for cheque dishonor. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. complainant's proof of cheque execution establishes liability. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. revisional jurisdiction's limits prevent overturning of lower court decisions. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. final ruling affirms lower court's sentence and conviction without alteration. (Para 8 , 9) |
ORDER
The challenge in this Crl.Revision Petition is to the judgment dated 18.06.2025 in Crl.Appeal No.90 of 2024 passed by the Sessions Court, Thalassery, confirming the conviction and sentence rendered by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kannur, in judgment dated
19.04.2024 in S.T No.1555 of 2018.
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 imprisonment till rising of the Court. He was also directed to pay a fine of Rs.3,00,000/-.
3. Respondent No.1/complainant filed a complaint before the Trial Court alleging that the revision petitioner/accused executed Ext.P1 cheque for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-. The complainant presented the cheque for encashment. It was dishonoured unpaid due t
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
