IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2008 / 5TH MAGHA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3542 of 2007() ------------------------------ CRA.771/2004 OF ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE(ADHOC III NORTH PARUR) CC.261/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, ALUVA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- KAMALA MAHADEVAN, W/O MAHADEVAN, HOUSE NO. 7/239, THUNGENCHERY MADOM, NEAR MOOKAMBIKA TEMPLE, N.PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.JACOB VARGHESE SRI.VARUGHESE M EASO SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. SMT.NISHA JOHN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS ------------------------------------- 1. M/S SREE GOKULAM CHIT AND FINANCE CO.(P) LTD., REGD. OFFICE AT 26, MUTHUGRAMANI STREET, MYLAPORE, MADRAS-4, REP. BY ITS P/A HOLDER K.P.REGHUNATH, S/O KRISHNA PILLAI, BRANCH MANAGER, SREE GOKULAM CHIT AND FINANCE CO.(P) LTD., KAYATHU BUILDINGS, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DIST. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.R.P.No.3542 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th 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. The cheque is for an amount of Rs.98,432/-. It bears the date 07.09.2001. The petitioner now faces a sentence of imprisonment till rising of court. There is a further direction to pay the actual cheque amount of Rs.98,432/- as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C and in default to undergo s.i for a further period of 15 days. 2. The courts below concurrently came to the conclusion that the complainant has succeeded in establishing all ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. Accordingly they proceeded to pass the impugned concurrent judgments. 3. The petitioner has come up in revision. Called upon to explain the nature of challenge which the petitioner wants to mount against the impugned concurrent judgments, the learned counsel for the petitioner does not strain to assail the verdict of Crl.R.P.No.3542 of 2007 2 guilty and conviction on merits. The counsel only prays that some further time may be granted for making the payment of the compensation amount and thus avoid the default sentence. 4. In the absence of challenge on any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail. I do take note of the fact that the complainant had examined PW1 and proved Exts.P1 to P7. Ext.P6 reply notice was issued by the accused to the complainant on receipt of the notice of demand. Exts.D1 to D7 were marked by the accused, but no other defence evidence whatsoever has been adduced. Both courts have not considered Exts.D1 to D7 in detail. But the trial court has observed in para.7 of its judgment that Exts.D1 to D7 do not help the petitioner to prove his case. Even in spite of a pointed query by this Court, no attempt whatsoever was made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to advance any arguments on the basis of Ext.P6, Exts.D1 to D7 or cross examination of PW1 to build up any contention against the verdict of guilty and conviction. Though Exts.D1 to D7 have not been considered in detail by the courts below, I am satisfied that the impugned verdict of guilty and conviction are justified and do not warrant interference. Crl.R.P.No.3542 of 2007 3 5. Coming to the question of sentence, I note that the maximum possible leniency has already been shown to the petitioner. I do not, in these circumstances, find any merit or grace in the prayer for any long further period of time to pay the amount and avoid the default sentence. However, I am satisfied that a breathing time can be granted to the petitioner to raise and pay the amount and avoid the default sentence. 6. In the result, this revision petition is dismissed, but with the direction/observation that the impugned sentence shall not be executed till 29.02.08. The petitioner shall have time till 29.02.08 to raise and pay the amount and avoid the default sentence. On or before 01.03.08 the petitioner shall appear and the sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate for execution of the sentence imposed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- Crl.R.P.No.3542 of 2007 4