IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2011 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1491 of 2011() ------------------------------ CRA.268/2008 of ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT(ADHOC)III, PATHANAMTHITTA CC.346/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, THIRUVALLA .......................................... REVN. PETITIONER: PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------- K.K.SASIDHARAN, KAVUMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANDANADU WEST, CHENGANNOOR. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SASI RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT --------------------- 1. RAJESH.C.BABU, SAMADHI, KIZHAKKUM NADA, CHENGANNOOR. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ FOR R1 SRI.SAJJU.S FOR R1 R2 BY P.P. SRI V. TEK CHAND. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 1491 of 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June, 2011 O R D E R The accused in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I.Act') is the revision petitioner and the challenge in this Revision Petition is against the conviction and sentence, imposed as per judgments of the trial court as well as the lower appellate court. 2. As this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of conviction, learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the sentence imposed against the revision petitioner is exorbitant and unreasonable and the same may be set aside. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that some breathing time may be granted to the revision petitioner to pay the fine amount as ordered by the courts below. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, I am of the view that the said submission can be considered positively and while granting time, the interest of the complainant has Crl.R.PNO.1491 of 2011 :-2-: also to be protected. 4. In the present case, the cheque in question is dated 5.1.2004, that too for an amount of Rs.30,000/-. The trial court has imposed a sentence of three months simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- and the appellate court confirmed the same. The Honourable Apex Court in the decision reported in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457] has held that in the case of dishonour of cheques, the compensatory aspect of the remedy should be given priority over the punitive aspects. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances indicated above and the settled legal position, I am of the view that the sentence of imprisonment can be reduced into one day simple imprisonment , i.e. till the rising of the court, but at the same time the fine amount can be enhanced. In the result, this Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner under Section 138 Crl.R.PNO.1491 of 2011 :-3-: of the N.I.Act as recorded by the courts below. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment ordered by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court is modified and reduced to one day simple imprisonment, i.e., till the rising of the court. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to pay fine of Rs.40,500/- (Rupees Forty Thousand and Five hundred only) within two months from today and in default, he is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 16th August, 2011 to receive the modified sentence ordered by this Court and to deposit the above enhanced fine amount. In case of any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in appearing before the trial court on the above date to receive the modified sentence fixed by this Court and to deposit the fine amount, the trial court is free to take coercive steps to secure the presence of the revision petitioner and to execute the sentence and to realise the fine amount. On realisation of the fine amount, the same Crl.R.PNO.1491 of 2011 :-4-: shall be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357 (1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. Coercive steps, if any, pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till 16th August, 2011. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. KVM/-