9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 510X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ory notice is also issued against Kunjumol Renjith. In such circumstances, the trial court is perfectly justified in acquitting the accused, who is Kunjumol Renjith. There is no reason to interfere with the acquittal order passed by the trial court. Appeal dismissed. - CRL.A.No.1819 OF 2005 - - - Dated:- 25-9-2020 - THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FOR THE PETITIONER : BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SIDHARTHAN (SR.) SMT.ASHITHA.S, AMICUS CURIAE FOR THE RESPONDENT : R1 BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.MAYA M.N JUDGMENT When this Criminal Appeal was posted for final hearing on several occasions, there was no representation for the appellant. A Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 Cr.P. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst Kunjumol Renjith because the drawer of the cheque is Kochumol. The point is considered by the trial court in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the trial court judgment. The same is extracted hereunder: 6. Points 1 and 2: The case of the complainant alleged in the complaint and developed through the oral evidence of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P11 is that the accused issued Ext.P2 cheque towards the discharge of the liability of her husband with the complainant concern and the same was dishonoured for the reason 'insufficiency of funds' and she did not pay the cheque amount inspite of the demand made as per Ext.P5 notice in compliance of Sec.138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act. A defence is set up on behalf of the accused challenging the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... complainant to initiate the prosecution against the correct person, the drawer of the cheque and even though a wrong person came before the court on obtaining summons on the basis of a complaint in which the said person is shown as the accused, that person is entitled to raise this type of objection and contest for discharge or challenge the maintainability of the complaint at any stage eventhough she did not raise such an objection at the earliest opportunity. In this case, the notice u/s 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, Ext.P5, stands issued to Kunjumol Renjit, the accused. Actually the notice has to be issued to the drawer of the cheque, Kochumol Renjith. The complaint also is filed against a wrong person. So, I am of the view t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
