IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2009 / 19TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 99 of 2009() ---------------------------- CRA.1213/2006 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-IV, TRIVANDRUM ST.285/2006 of JFCMMC-X, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED --------------------- B.S. SYAM KUMAR, LAB ASSISTANT , S.N. COLLEGE, CHEMPAZHANTHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE --------------- 1. P. SASI KUMAR, S/O. PADMANABHA IYER, FLAT NO. 4-5, PALAYAM POLICE QUARTERS, NEAR CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR STADIUM, VILAS BHAVAN P.O.,PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF MERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.MUHAMMED PUZHAKKARA THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P.NO.99 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 9th January 2009 O R D E R Revision petitioner is the accused and first respondent, the complainant in S.T.285/06 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram. Revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. He challenged the conviction before Sessions court, Thiruvananthapuram in Crl.A.1213/06. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on re-appreciation of evidence confirmed the conviction but modified sentence to imprisonment till rising of court and compensation of Rs.1,20,000/-, the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. Revision is filed challenging the conviction and the sentence. 2. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioner was heard. 3. Learned counsel in view of concurrent findings of fact and the evidence on record submitted that revision petitioner is not challenging the CRRP 99/09 2 conviction or the sentence but revision petitioner may be granted six months' time to pay the compensation. 4. On going through the judgments of the courts below, I find no reason to interfere with the conviction or the sentence. Evidence establish that Ext.P1 cheque was issued by revision petitioner for repayment of Rs.1,20,000/- due to first respondent. Cheque was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds, when presented for encashment and first respondent had complied with all the statutory formalities provided under Sections 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Conviction of revision petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is perfectly legal. Learned Additional Sessions Judge modified the sentence to imprisonment till rising of court in addition to a fine which was for the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. In such circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with sentence also. 5. Revision is dismissed. Revision petitioner is granted six months' time to pay the fine. Revision petitioner is directed to appear before Judicial First Class Magistrate, Pathanamthitta on 9/7/09. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.