2025 (7) TMI 1528

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....C No.450/2019 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (Temporary), Muvattupuzha. As per the impugned judgment, the revision petitioner was found guilty under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'NI Act'). The 1st respondent is the complainant. Hereinafter the revision petitioner and the 1st respondent are mentioned as accused and complainant 2. The complainant's case in brief are as follows: Complainant is doing fabrication works of ships in Cochin Shipyard in the name and style as Excellent Ship Builders along with his friend one Rijo. On 21.01.2013 Complainant and his friend Rijo entered an agreement with the accused to purchase his property for Rs.58 lakhs and paid a total amount of Rs Rs.52,02,86....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....entence of six months to till rising of the court. The default sentence already granted by the trial court is confirmed by the appellate court. Aggrieved by the same, this revision petition is filed. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner, learned counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The counsel for the accused raised a short point. The counsel submitted that admitted case of the accused is that the amount due is to the complainant and another. If that is the case, without any authorization from the other person, the complainant cannot prosecute the case. The accused relied on the judgment of this Court in Sunil K.J. v. State of Kerala and Another [2020 (4) KHC 347]. The counsel ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of others. It can be by way of power of attorney by the other persons to the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque. It can also be by way of different modes of authorization. If the cheque is dishonoured, the prosecution can be initiated by the 'payee' or 'the holder in due course' of the cheque alone. But the 'payee' or the 'holder in due course' can prosecute a complaint in such a situation only if there is an authorization to him by the other persons. The other persons can also adduce evidence before the court that, the payee or the holder in due course received the cheque on their behalf. But without a power of attorney or authorization or any other evidence authorising the payee or the holder i....