IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 27TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 6TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3691 OF 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.317/2002 of SESSIONS COURT, THALASSERY CC.880/1998 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, KANNUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S):APPELLANT/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- P.GANESHAN, S/O. PONMANI NADAR, AGED 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.644, NEAR VENGARA VAYAL, P.O.CHIRAKKAL R.S., KANNUR-670 011. BY ADV. SMT.K.B.SUJATHA SMT.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL) RESPONDENT(S):RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: --------------------------- 1. A.MOIDEEN, S/O. KAMAL, AGED 64 YEARS, KAMBIL, KARAL PUTHIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THALIPARAMBIL TALUK, KOLACHERI P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. KAMMAPPU FOR R2 SRI.V.RAMKUMAR NAMBIAR FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P. NO. 3691 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 27th day of November, 2008 O R D E R Revision petitioner is the accused and first respondent the complainant in C.C.880 of 2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kannur. Petitioner was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Petitioner challenged the conviction before Sessions Court, Thalassery in Crl. Appeal 317 of 2002. Learned Sessions Judge on reappreciation of evidence confirmed the conviction and sentence and dismissed the appeal. It is challenged in the revision. 2. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioner and first respondent were heard. 3. The learned counsel submitted that revision petitioner is not challenging the conviction but sentence may be modified. Ext.P1 cheque was issued on 26.6.1998. Though petitioner raised a contention that Ext.P1 cheque was issued as a blank cheque, for purchase of 10 loads of sand, learned CRRP 3691/08 2 Magistrate and learned Sessions Judge on appreciation of evidence rejected the defence case and found that Ext.P1 cheque was issued towards discharge of existing liability. I find no reason to interfere with that factual finding. Evidence also establish that Ext.P1 cheque was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds and first respondent had complied with all the statutory formalities provided under section 138 and 142 of N.I. Act. Conviction of the petitioner for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is perfectly legal. 4. Then the only question is regarding the sentence. Ext.P1 cheque is for Rs. 30,900/-. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, interest of justice will be met if the sentence is modified to imprisonment till rising of Court in addition to a fine of Rs.30,900/- and in default simple imprisonment for two months. On realisation of fine it is to be paid to first respondent as compensation. Petitioner is granted three months time from today, to pay the fine. Petitioner is directed to appear before the Magistrate on 2.3.2009. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Okb/-