IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2008 / 28TH POUSHA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 128 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRA.843/2003 of ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE, ADHOC-III, N.PARAVUR CC.212/2001 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PARAVUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------ RAPHEL, S/O.AUGUSTIN, AGED 55 YEARS KALIYATHU VEEDU, MULAVUKADU KARA PONNARIMANGALAM VILLAGE KANAYANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.PKM.HASSAN SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SUDHI, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.DAMODARAN PULLARKKAT VEED, CHOWARA KARA SREEMOOLANAGARAM VILLAGE, OWNER OF SINI SAW MILLS, CHERAI KARA, PALLIPURAM VILLAGE 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM ADDL. 3. SMT.USHA, W/O.SUDHI PULLARKKAT VEEDU, CHOWARA KARA SREEMOOLANAGARAM VILLAGE CHERAI KARA, PALLIPURAM VILLAGE ADDL 4. SINI, D/O.SUDHI PULLARKKAT VEEDU, CHOWARA KARA, SREEMOOLANAGARAM VILLAGE CHERAI KARA, PALLIPURAM VILLAGE ADDL. 5. JIBIN, S/O.SUDHI, PULLARKKAT VEEDU, CHOWARA KARA, SREEMOOLANAGARAM VILLAGE CHERAI KARA, PALLIPURAM VILLAGE ADDL. 6. SUNI, S/O.SUDHI PULLARKKAT VEEDU, CHOWARA KARA, SREEMOOLANAGARAM VILLAGE CHERAI KARA, PALLIPURAM VILLAGE (IMPLEADED AS ADDL.RESPONDENTS 3, 4, 5 AND 6 BY ORDER DATED 18.1.08 IN CRL.M.A.11996/07) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.GIKKU JACOB SRI.SANTHOSH G. PRABHU SRI.A.B.XAVIER THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.1.08 , THE COURT ON 18/01/2008 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Crl.R.P. No. 128 OF 2008 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 18th day of January, 2008 O R D E R This revision petition is directed against a concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. 2. When this revision petition came up for hearing, it is submitted at the Bar by counsel for the rival contestants that the matter has been settled and the offence has been compounded by the legal heirs of the complainant. A joint compromise petition duly signed by the rival contestants and counter signed by their respective counsel is also filed. The learned counsel for the respondent/legal heirs of the complainant vouches that the signature appearing in the application for composition is that of the legal heirs of the complainant. 3. The offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is now compoundable after the amendment to the N.I. Act. I am CRRP.128/08 : 2 : satisfied, from the submissions made at the Bar and the joint statement filed by them, that the parties have settled their dispute amicably. I find no reason not to accept the composition. 4. In the result: (a) Crl.M.A.373/08 is allowed and the composition is accepted. (b) The acceptance of the composition shall have the effect of acquittal of the accused of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act as stipulated under Section 320(8) of the Cr.P.C. (c) Consequently, this revision petition is allowed. The impugned judgments are set aside. The bail bond executed by the accused shall stand discharged and he is set at liberty. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks