Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Sri Suryateja Wines

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN THURSDAY, THE 23rd DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1945 CRL.A NO. 483 OF 2006 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.11.2005 IN C.C.No.414/2000 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT: NIAZ V.A., S/o ABDUL RAHIMAN, VALIYAVEETTIL, HOUSE NO.37/2425, P.C.ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI-17. BY ADV SRI.P.B.ASOKAN RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED & STATE: 1 M/s PATTASSERIL CEMENET MARKETING, NEAR BOY'S HIGH SCHOOL, TRIPUNITHURA, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER, SMT.SUSAN ELIAS. 2 SMT.SUSAN ELIAS, W/o JIMMY ELIAS, MANAGING PARTNER, PATTASSERIL CEMENT MARKETING, TRIPUNITHURA. 3 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY SMT.THANKOM.G SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE BY SMT. DEEPA NOBLE (AMICUS CURIAE) BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.N.PRABHAKARAN THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 23.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.Appeal No.483 of 2006 2 JUDGMENT This appeal is against the order of acquittal in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is by the complainant. 2. The order of acquittal was passed by the trial court mainly on the reason that the cheque is not drawn in the handwriting of accused, though it contains the signature as that of him. The handwriting was sent for expert opinion with 33 writings obtained from the accused. The expert opinion is against the case advanced by the complainant that it is in the handwriting of accused. The expert was also examined for that purpose. Further, the source of an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- was not sufficiently explained. The explanation given by the complainant that it is out of the commission amount received in a real estate business has got its own inconsistency and improbability, especially when he is not an income tax payee and no annual

Crl.Appeal No.483 of 2006 3 return was submitted. Hence, there is no reason to interfere with the finding of trial court. The appeal fails, dismissed. The assistance given by the Amicus Curiae Smt.Deepa Noble is placed on record with high appreciation. Sd/- P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE DMR/-

Crl.Appeal No.483 of 2006 4 APPENDIX OF CRL.A 483/2006 RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES Annexure - R1(a) TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY K.MUHAMMED SALI TO THE HUSBAND OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.02.2017 Annexure - R1(b) TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF COMPROMISE PETITION SUBMITTED BETWEEN PATTASSERIL AGENCIES AND K.M.SALI IN R.F.A.NO.309/2004 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 05.01.2017 Annexure - R1(c) TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF JUDGMENT IN R.F.A.NO.309/2004 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 01.03.2017 Annexure - R1(d) TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF JUDGMENT IN CRL.R.P. NO.1918/2004 ON THE FILES OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 18.08.2015 Annexure - R1(e) TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF DD NO.240911 DRAWN ON SOUTH INDIAN BANK,TRIPUNITHURA BRANCH DATED 06.01.2017 Annexure - R1(f) TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF DD NO.849569 DRAWN ON SOUTH INDIAN BANK, TRIPUNITHURA BRANCH DATED 06.01.2017 Annexure - R1(g) TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF DD NO.849679 DRAWN ON PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK TRIPUNITHURA BRANCH DATED 27.02.2017 // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE