IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2009 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2611 of 2003(C) ------------------------------- CRA.124/2002 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA CC.198/1999 of JDUL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, RAMANKARI .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED 5 & 6 -------------------------------------- 1. P.T.THOMAS, S/O. THOMAS, PALLADANS, KOKKOTHAMANGALAM, CHERTHALA. 2. FRANCIS THOMAS S/O. THOMAS, PALLADANS, KOKKOTHAMANGALAM, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.DEEPU THANKAN SMT.DEEPA DEEPU THANKAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE ------------------------------------------------ 1. M.G.MADHAVAN NAIR, S/O. JANARDHANAN NAIR, PAYAMPALLIL, PUNNAKUNNAM, PULINCUNNU. . 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTEDN BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU FOR R1 SMT.P.MAYA FOR R1 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.J.MUHAMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ALONG WITH CRL.A.2655 & 2659 OF 2009 ON 08/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.Q. BARKATH ALI, J. ------------------------------------------------------ CRL. R.P. 2611, 2655 & 2659 of 2003 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: DECEMBER 8, 2009 ORDER These three revision petitions are filed by different accused persons in C.C. No.198/1999 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ramankari challenging its judgment dated April 18, 2002, convicting them under sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentencing them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- each, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of three months each, which is confirmed in appeal in Crl.A.119/2002, 123/2002 and 124/2002 of Addl. Sessions Court, Alappuzha by judgment dt. August 29, 2003. Crl.A.No.119/2002 was filed by Accused Nos.4 and 7. Crl.A.123/2002 was filed by the 3rd accused and Crl.A.124/2002 was filed by Accused Nos.5 and 6. Accused Nos.4 and 7 have filed Crl.R.P.2659/2003, accused Nos.5 and 6 have filed Crl.R.P.2611/2003 and accused No.3 has filed Crl.R.P.2655/2003. Crl.R.P.2659/2003 is directed against the judgment of the Sessions Court, Alappuzha in Crl.A.119/2002. In Crl.R.P.2611/2003 the judgment of the lower court in Crl.A. 123/2002 is challenged and in Crl.R.P.2655/2003 the judgment of the lower court in Crl.A. 122/2002 is challenged. 2. The case of the complainant as testified by him as PW.1 CRL. R.P. 2611, 2655 & 2659 of 2003 2 before the trial court and as detailed in the complaint is that the accused borrowed Rs.5 lakhs from the complainant and to discharge that liability he issued Ext.P1 (copy of the cheque) dated 1.9.1998 drawn on the Kodungallur Branch of the Canara Bank which, when presented for collection, was returned dishonoured for want of sufficiency of funds in the account of the accused persons in the bank and that in spite of the notice Ext.P3, the accused persons did not repay the amount, which is an offence punishable under sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. Initially there were 8 accused persons. The 1st accused is M/s. Matha Modern Mills, Alappuzha, represented by the Managing Partner 2nd accused. The other accused persons are its partners. On receipt of the complaint the trial court recorded the sworn statement of the complainant/PW.1 and took cognizance of the case. The accused persons on appearance before the trial court pleaded not guilty to the charge under sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exts.P1 to P15 were marked on the side of the complainant. On the side of the accused persons DWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exts.D1 to D3 were marked. When questioned under sec.313 Cr.P.C. by the trial court, the accused CRL. R.P. 2611, 2655 & 2659 of 2003 3 persons denied the transaction. 4. The trial court on an appreciation of evidence found the revision petitioners guilty of the offence punishable under sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, convicted them thereunder and sentenced them as aforesaid, which is confirmed in appeal. The accused persons have now come up in revision challenging their conviction and sentence. 5. Heard the counsel for the revision petitioners and the revision 1st respondent/complainant. 6. When the revisions came up for consideration today the revision petitioners in Crl.R.P.2659/2003 filed a petition to seek impleadment of the legal heirs of the deceased complainant which was allowed by me and the legal heirs of the deceased complainant are impleaded as additional respondents 3 to 7 in Crl.R.P.2659/2003. 7. Counsel for the revision petitioners produced copy of the judgment of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ramankari in C.C.No.204/205 dated May 31, 2005. It was a case split up from the present case against accused Nos.1, 2 and 8. It is seen from that judgment that the matter has been compounded as against accused Nos.1, 2 and 8 before the trial court and they were acquitted under CRL. R.P. 2611, 2655 & 2659 of 2003 4 sec.320 Cr.P.C. As the offence under sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is already compounded before the trial court as against the complainant and accused Nos.1, 2 and 8, the revision petitioners who are accused Nos.3 to 7 in the said case are also to be acquitted under sec.320 Cr.P.C. In the result, the revision petitions are allowed. The conviction and sentence of the revision petitioners rendered by the trial court under sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act which is confirmed in appeal are set aside and they are found not guilty of the offences charged and are acquitted under sec.320 of Cr.P.C. If the accused persons have deposited any amount before the trial court, it shall be refunded to the accused persons. Their bail bonds are cancelled. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE CRL.M.P.10413, 10627 & 10642 of 2003 Dismissed. 8.12.2009. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mt/-