IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2011 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1521 of 2011 ------------------------------------- (C.C.NO.380/2008 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II (ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF),KASARAGOD & CRL.A.NO.122/2009 OF THE SESSIONS COURT, KASARAGOD) REVN. PETITIONER(S): REVN.PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------- SHAREEF,S/O.BEDRAN,NISHA QUARTERS, CHETTUMKUSHI,HIDAYATH NAGAR.P.O,VIDYANAGAR VIA, KASARAGOD TALUK,KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON RESPONDENTS(S): COMPLAINANT AND STATE -------------------------- 1. C.A.ASHRAF,S/O.ASSINAR,CHERANGI HOUSE, KUDLU,KASARAGOD TALUK,KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA,REP;BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEK CHAND. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 1521 of 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June, 2011 O R D E R The challenge in this Crl.R.P. is against the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. 2. As this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of conviction, learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the sentence imposed against the revision petitioner is unreasonable and the same may be set aside. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that some breathing time may be granted to the revision petitioner to pay the compensation amount as ordered by the trial court, confirmed by the appellate court. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, I am of the view that the said submission can be considered positively and while granting time, the interest of the complainant has also to be protected. Crl.R.PNO.1521 of 2011 :-2-: 4. In the present case, the cheque in question is dated 31.5.2008, that too for an amount of Rs.90,000/-. Though the courts below have concurrently found that the cheque in question was issued towards the discharge of the liability that is due to the complainant, so far no amount is seen paid. Though the trial court has imposed a sentence of three months simple imprisonment, the appellate court has reduced the same to ten days simple imprisonment. The Honourable Apex Court in the decision reported in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457] has held that in the case of dishonour of cheques, the compensatory aspect of the remedy should be given priority over the punitive aspects. Therefore, considering the above settled legal position, I am of the view that the sentence of imprisonment ordered against the revision petitioner requires modification. But, at the same time, the interest of the complainant has also to be protected. In the result, this Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner under Section 138 Crl.R.PNO.1521 of 2011 :-3-: of the N.I.Act as recorded by the courts below. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment ordered by the trial court and modified by the appellate court is further modified and reduced to one day simple imprisonment, i.e., till the rising of the court. While confirming the direction to pay compensation confirmed by the appellate court, the compensation amount is enhanced and accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to pay compensation of `.1,03,500/- (Rupees One Lakh Three Thousand Five Hundred only) to the complainant under Section 357(3) of the Cr.P.C. within two months from today and in default, he is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 16th August, 2011 to receive the modified sentence ordered by this Court and to pay the above enhanced compensation amount. In case of any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in appearing before the trial court on the above date to receive the modified sentence fixed by this Court and to pay Crl.R.PNO.1521 of 2011 :-4-: the compensation amount, the trial court is free to take coercive steps to secure the presence of the revision petitioner and to execute the sentence and to realise the compensation. Coercive steps, if any, pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till 16th August,2011. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. MBS/