Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
MOHAMMED JASHID KARIPODI – Appellant
Versus
ABDUL SALAM.L – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court addresses the appeal based on the grounds of conviction under the specified law. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner requests time to comply with the appellate court's conditions. (Para 2) |
| 3. the court extends the deadline for the fine payment, highlighting inherent powers. (Para 3) |
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.1682 OF 2026 -----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2026 ORDER Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner by the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdurg (‘Trial Court’), as per Annexure AI order, for allegedly committing an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (‘N.I.Act’, in short), the petitioner preferred Crl.A.No.90/2024 before the Court of Session, Kasaragod (‘Appellate Court’). Along with the appeal, the petitioner filed an application to suspend the substantive sentence and fine imposed on the petitioner. The Appellate Court suspended the sentence, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits 20% of the fine amount within 60 days. By Annexure AII order, the Appellate Court granted a further extension upto 30
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
