Skip to content
Try for free
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.
See full guide →

K.Dineshan vs C.C.Krishnan

K.Dineshan vs C.C.Krishnan

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 29, 2023
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1439499

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl.Rev.Pet/1344/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

K.Dineshan

Respondent

C.C.Krishnan

Excerpt

.....section 147 of the negotiable instrument act r/w section 482 of code of criminal procedure, for compounding the case and for terminating the procedures.2. the revision petitioner was the accusedin cc no.970/2012 of the judicial first class magistrate court, thaliparamba. he was convicted and sentenced by the learned magistrate for the commission of offence under section 138 of the negotiable instrument act. since, the conviction was upheld in appeal, he preferred the present revision against the 1 st3. now, that it is submitted by the learnedcounsel for the revision petitioner, as well as the learned counsel for the 1st respondent, that the issue has been amicably settled between the parties and that there is no claim whatsoever subsisting from the revision petitioner to the 1 st4. having regard to the above facts relatingto the settlement of the dispute between the parties, i feel that, it is necessary to terminate this revision proceedings as well as all further proceedings consequent to the impugned judgments of the courts below. in the result, the petition stands allowed. the case which was numbered as cc no.970/2012 of the judicial first class magistrate court, thaliparamba, which resulted in the present revision proceedings stands lawfully compounded. the petitioner/accused is acquitted under section 320(8) of cr.p.c. r/w section 147 of the negotiable instrument act. sd/- g. girish nvj judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 8TH POUSHA, 1945 CRL.REV.PET NO. 1344 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 970/2012 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,TALIPARAMBA CRA 21/2016 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,THALASSERY REVISION PETITIONER/ACCUSED: K.DINESHAN AGED 62 YEARS, S/O LATE KONGINI RAGHAVAN, RESIDING AT TMC.XV-251, BEHIND RAJASTHAN MARBLE PALACE, KUTTIKOLE P.O, THALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670562 BY ADVS. P.V.THOMAS TONY GEORGE THOMAS RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE: 1 C.C.KRISHNAN AGED 60 YEARS, S/O KOMAN NAIR, RESIDING AT LEVIL, KOOVERY, THALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670581 2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV. SR.-SRI.SANGEETHRAJ N.R. PP SRI. P.R. AJITH KUMAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

G. GIRISH, J.

------------------ Crl.MA. No.4 of 2023 in ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of December, 2023

ORDER

The Revision Petitioner, along with the 1 st respondent, has filed this petition under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act r/w Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, for compounding the case and for terminating the procedures.

2. The revision petitioner was the accused

in CC No.970/2012 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thaliparamba. He was convicted and sentenced by the learned Magistrate for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Since, the conviction was upheld in appeal, he preferred the present revision against the 1 st

3. Now, that it is submitted by the learned

counsel for the revision petitioner, as well as the learned counsel for the 1st respondent, that the issue has been amicably settled between the parties and that there is no claim whatsoever subsisting from the revision petitioner to the 1 st

4. Having regard to the above facts relating

to the settlement of the dispute between the parties, I feel that, it is necessary to terminate this revision proceedings as well as all further proceedings consequent to the impugned judgments of the courts below. In the result, the petition stands allowed. The case which was numbered as CC No.970/2012 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thaliparamba, which resulted in the present revision proceedings stands lawfully compounded. The petitioner/accused is acquitted under Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C. r/w Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Sd/- G. GIRISH nvj JUDGE

Continue Your Research

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties K.Dineshan vs C.C.Krishnan Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice G.Girish

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales