TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court affirms conviction & sentence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Evidence supports complainant's claim.</h1> <h3>SREEKUMAR V Versus SANTHOSH, STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM</h3> SREEKUMAR V Versus SANTHOSH, STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - TMI Issues:Challenge to conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.Analysis:The revision petitioner, the accused in the case, challenged the conviction and sentence imposed under Section 138 of the Act. The complainant alleged that the petitioner borrowed a sum of money and issued a cheque in discharge of the debt, which was not honored. The trial court found the petitioner guilty and sentenced him to pay a fine and face imprisonment in default. The appellate court confirmed the conviction but modified the sentence. The High Court, after examining the evidence, found no reason to interfere with the lower courts' decisions. The petitioner failed to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the Act, and the evidence supported the complainant's claims.The High Court noted that the lower courts had correctly appreciated the evidence and reached the right conclusion regarding the conviction. The petitioner's request for a period to remit the fine was considered, and a three-month period was granted for the same. The judgment confirmed the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, granting the petitioner three months to pay the fine amount. The courts found no grounds to interfere with the sentence imposed on the petitioner.
TaxTMI 