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

2009 Supreme(Online)(KER) 6795

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
M.C.HARI RANI, J
KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates:
['K RAMAKUMAR SR', 'A SAMEER', '', 'DINESH R SHENOY', 'PUBLIC PROSECUTOR']

ORDER

Petitioners 1 and 2 have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to set aside Annexure-D order. Annexure-D is the copy of the order dated 9-9-2005 in C.M.P.No.2081/2001 in C.C.No.876/2003 passed by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kochi. In the said order it is mentioned that the said petition was filed by the complainant,2nd respondent herein to take cognizance of offence under Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The respondent in that petition is the accused in the case filed for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and is the 2nd petitioner herein. As per that order, the learned Magistrate has allowed the petition taking cognizance of the offence under Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code against the accused and Mr.Krishnankutty CRMC. 3890/2005 -2-

Nair. Cognizance of offence under Section 417 of I.P.C.was also taken against the first accused. Paragraph 19 of the impugned order reads as follows:

“In the instant case when Ext.P2 cheque returned dishonoured ‘Exceeds arrangement' by the bank and default in payment in spite of Ext.P4 notice resulted an act of offence und

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top