RAJAMOHANAN NAIR Vs. SHAJI P S

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.598/2006 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-VI, Thiruvananthapuram, for offence punishable under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, instituted on the basis of the complaint filed by the 1 st respondent (complainant). The trial court as per the impugned judgment dated 16.10.2006 had convicted the petitioner and had sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner had preferred Crl.Appeal No.1049/ 2006 before the appellate Sessions Court concerned (Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Thiruvananthapuram). The appellate court as per the impugned appellate judgment dated 8.2.2010 had upheld the conviction and had also confirmed the sentence and thereby dismissed the appeal. It is aggrieved by the said concurrent findings of both the courts below that the revision petitioner accused had preferred the instant revision petition by taking recourse to the remedies available under Sec.397 read with Sec.401 of the Cr.P.C.

(2.) Heard Sri.D.Sajeev, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner accused, Sri.C.J.Joy, learned counsel appearing for the 1 st respondent complainant and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Prosecutor appearing for R-2 State.

(3.) Since the earlier Advocate appearing for the revision petitioner had died, this Court had issued notice directly to the party so as to take up the matter for final hearing and the said notice sent to the revision petitioner with hearing date as 5.12.2015 was returned unserved with the endorsement, "no such addressee". Therefore, this Court was constrained to pass order dated 10.2.2017 vacating the earlier interim order suspending the impugned sentence, etc. Now the revision petitioner accused has entered appearance through his new counsel, Sri.D.Sajeev. Sri.D.Sajeev, counsel has now submitted that the revision petitioner accused has shifted his residence and the matter was duly intimated to his earlier counsel, who has later died and since this fact could not be communicated to the Registry, the notice sent to his earlier address was returned unserved, etc. It is submitted on the basis of the instructions of his party that the present address of the revision petitioner accused is "Sri.K.Rajamohan Nair, S/o.Kuttappan Nair, 'Karthika', Kattakada P.O., Thiruvananthapuram-695 572. Accordingly, it is ordered that the Registry will show the said address of the revision petitioner also in the cause-title.