IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/30TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 CRRP.No. 3025 of 2011 ........................................ (AGAINST THE OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE IN CRL. APPEAL NO. 82/08 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-1, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND IN CC.NO. 409/2003 ON THE FILE OF JFMC -111, THIRUVANATHAPURAM) ==================== REVISION PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED/APPELLANT ========================================== 1 BASHEER, XVIII/-225 VATTIYOORKAVU GRAMA PANCHAYAT HILL PALACE MENON NAGAR NEAR J.J. HSPITAL INDIRA NAGAR PAROORKADA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV.SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT(S) ============================= 1 N.ANIL KUMAR, TC 16/13339(3) 'ABHIRAMA' KANNETTUMUKU THYCAUD P.O THIRUVANNTHAPURAM- 695 001. 2 STATE OF KERALA- REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM - 682 031 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI T. R. RAJESH THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSIO ON 21-12-2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: DCS S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.3025 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2011 O R D E R Challenge in the revision is by the accused, who has been convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short “the Act”), concurrently, by two courts below. Sentence imposed against him as modified by the Sessions Judge in appeal, is imprisonment till the rising of the court with direction to pay compensation of Rs.87,000/- to the complainant with default term of simple imprisonment for three months. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner/ accused reiterated the challenges canvassed before the courts below to assail his conviction. The accused had set up a defence canvassing a plea of discharge. An amount of Rs.25,000/- alone was obtained from the complainant for which the cheque Crl.R.P.No.3025 of 2011 :: 2 :: in blank form with signature alone was given as security and subsequently, the amount borrowed was repaid was his case. When a plea of discharge is set up by the accused, it need not be stated that the burden is entirely on him to prove it by tendering cogent and convincing legal evidence. Other than putting forth some suggestions during the cross- examination of the complainant examined as PW.1, no other material was tendered by the accused to establish the aforesaid defence pleaded to resist his prosecution. Statutory notice issued on dishonour of the cheque also remained unresponded with payment or reply by the accused. The evidence of the complainant was found reliable and convincing to the magistrate to accept his case. The learned Sessions Judge, after re-appraisal has affirmed the conclusion so formed by the magistrate to sustain the conviction Crl.R.P.No.3025 of 2011 :: 3 :: rendered against the accused. When such be the case, I find no merit in the challenge now raised, reiterating the defence canvassed by the accused before the two courts below to assail his conviction. 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner requested for grant of some more time to pay the compensation and thus avoid the default term of imprisonment. Cheque involved in the case is seen drawn as early as in 2002 and the sum covered by that instrument is Rs.85,000/-. Compensation awarded is only Rs.87,000/-. When that be so, there is no merit in the request for seeking further time for payment. However, taking into considera the submissions made by the counsel, I find, a short period,a s indicated hereunder, can be provided for payment. 4. Affirming the conviction and sentence and the petitioner/accused is directed to appear before Crl.R.P.No.3025 of 2011 :: 4 :: the magistrate on 14.02.2012 to serve out the imprisonment till the rising of the court, and also report the payment of the compensation. Till the date fixed as above, the magistrate is directed to keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence, to enable him to pay the compensation within such period. In default of his appearance and non-payment of the compensation, the magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. Revision is disposed of as indicated above. Sd/- (S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN) JUDGE sk/- //true copy// P.S. to Judge.