IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2011 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2189 of 2004(C) ------------------------------- CRA.178/2003 of V ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM CC.551/1998 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOCHI .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT ------------------------------ P.M.JOY, C/O.PONNAN, MANAYATH, 26/2575, MATTAMMAL, THEVARA P.O., COCHIN-13. BY ADV. SRI.T.O.XAVIER RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT AND STATE ------------------------------------ 1. M.G.SAMUEL, 18/1686A, BETHANY, PALLURUTHY, COCHIN-6. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. ANEY PAUL SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN FOR R1 SMT.SANIKA.V.S. FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.C.HARI RANI, J ================= Crl.R.P.No.2189 OF 2004 =================== Dated this the 5th day of April 2011 O R D E R The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court as per judgment dated 25/1/2003 in C.C.No.551/1998 convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay Rs.45,000/- to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C.and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The appellate court dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and the sentence passed by the trial court vide judgment dated 30/4/2004 in Crl.Appeal No.178/2003. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor . 3. At the time of argument, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused that the revision petitioner is not challenging the concurrent finding of conviction CRRP 2189/2009 2 entered against him by the courts below for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. This Court has directed as per order dated 4/10/2004 in Crl.M.A.No.10165/2004 to deposit the entire cheque amount. Report is received from the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kochi which shows that no amount has been deposited by the revision petitioner/accused before that court in C.C.No.551/1998 during the year 2004. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner prays that three months time may be granted to the revision petitioner to pay/deposit the cheque amount. It is also prayed to modify the sentence of imprisonment for three months to imprisonment till rising of court. 4. The disputed cheque in this case is for Rs. 45,000/- dated 10/7/1997. A concurrent finding of guilty and conviction is there against the revision petitioner by the trial court as well as by the appellate court. About 13 years is already elapsed after the issuance of the disputed cheque. In the absence of challenge on any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail. Therefore, the verdict of guilty and conviction do not warrant any interference and the same is confirmed. Only the cheque amount of Rs.45,000/- has CRRP 2189/2009 3 been ordered as compensation by the courts below and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Considering the elapse of 13 years after the issuance of the cheque, I find that the compensation amount ordered by the courts below at Rs.45,000/-should be enhanced to Rs.50,000/-. The revision petitiner can be granted three months time to pay/deposit the total amount of compensation and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The sentence of simple imprisonment for three months is modified and reduced to imprisonment till rising of court. 5. In the result, a) This revision petition is allowed in part. b) The impugned concurrent verdict of guilty and conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are confirmed. (c) But the sentence imposed is modified and reduced. In spersession of the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the courts below, he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of court. He is further directed under Section 357(3)Cr.P.C.to pay/deposit the total amount of Rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand only), less the amount if any already deposited, as compensation CRRP 2189/2009 4 within three months and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. The amount in deposit, if any, and the balance amount if deposited shall be released to the complainant on proper application. The petitioner shall have time till 5/7/2011 to pay/deposit the total amount of compensation of Rs.50,000/- less the amount if any already deposited and thus avoid the default sentence. The petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on 6/7/2011 for execution of the sentence. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE ks CRRP 2189/2009 5 CRRP 2189/2009 6 CRRP 2189/2009 7 M.C.HARI RANI, J Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2001 ORDER 17th DAY OF JUNE 2001 CRRP 2189/2009 8 CRRP 2189/2009 9 M.C.HARI RANI, J ================= Crl.R.P.No.1864 OF 2004 =================== Dated this the 12th day of April 2011 O R D E R The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court as per judgment dated 27/9/2007 in S.T.No. 5661/2007 convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment CRRP 2189/2009 10 for three months and to pay Rs.1,60,000/- to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C.and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The appellate court allowed the appeal in part confirming the conviction and the sentence is modified to simple imprisonment for one day till rising of court and to pay compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- to the complainant and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months vide judgment dated 4/4/2009 in Crl.Appeal No.793/2007. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor . 3. At the time of argument, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused that the revision petitioner is not challenging the concurrent finding of conviction entered against him by the courts below for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The revision petitioner is ready to deposit the cheque amount. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner prays that eight months time may be granted to the revision petitioner to pay/deposit the amount. 4. The disputed cheque in this case is for Rs. 1,60,000/- CRRP 2189/2009 11 dated 1/7/2005. A concurrent finding of guilty and conviction is there against the revision petitioner by the trial court as well as by the appellate court. About five years is already elapsed after the issuance of the disputed cheque. In the absence of challenge on any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail. Therefore, the verdict of guilty and conviction do not warrant any interference and the same is confirmed. Only the cheque amount of Rs.1,60,000/- has been ordered as compensation by the courts below and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months ordered by the appellate court. This Court has directed as per order dated 30/6/2009 in Crl.M.A.No.5642/2009 to deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/-. If that amount is in deposit, I am inclined to direct the revision petitioner/accused to pay total compensation of Rs.1,65,000/- and five months time can be granted to pay/deposit the entire amount of compensation, less the amount if any already deposited by the revision petitioner and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for four months. The sentence imposed by the appellate court to suffer simple imprisonment for one day till rising of court is confirmed. 5. In the result, CRRP 2189/2009 12 a) This revision petition is allowed in part. b) The impugned concurrent verdict of guilty and conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are confirmed and the sentence imposed by the appellate court to suffer simple imprisonment for one day till rising of court is also confirmed. (c) The revision petitioner is directed under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to pay/deposit the total amount of Rs.1,65,000/- (Rupees one lakh sixty five thousand only), less the amount if any already deposited, as compensation and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four months. The amount in deposit, if any, and the balance amount if deposited shall be released to the complainant on proper application. The petitioner shall have time till 12/9/2011 to pay/deposit the total amount of compensation of Rs.1,65,000/- less the amount if any already deposited and thus avoid the default sentence. The petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on 13/9/2011 for execution of the sentence. CRRP 2189/2009 13 M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE ks CRRP 2189/2009 14 CRRP 2189/2009 15 CRRP 2189/2009 16 M.C.HARI RANI, J Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2001 CRRP 2189/2009 17 ORDER 17th DAY OF JUNE 2001 CRRP 2189/2009 18