IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2011 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2512 of 2011() -------------------------- CRA.52/2010 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-II), ERNAKULAM ST.2937/2005 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLENCHERRY .................. REVISION PETITIONER / APPELLANT / ACCUSED : ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SAJU, S/O.THANKAPPAN, AGED 36, THURUTHIKUNNEL HOUSE, PATHAMMILE, VADAYAMBADY PO PUTHENCURUZ. BY ADVS. SRI.K.R.KURUP SRI.C.R.VINOD KUMAR RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS / DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE : ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KOCHI - 682 031. 2. M.A.MATHAI, S/O.ALAXANDER, MOOTHEDATHU HOUSE, RAMAMANGALAM P.O. - 686 663. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SEENA R. R2 BY ADV. SRI.BIJU C. ABRAHAM THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P No.2512 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October 2011 ORDER Revision is by the accused who has been convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, 'NI Act'), concurrently, by the two courts below. Sentence imposed against the accused, as modified by the learned Sessions Judge in appeal, is imprisonment till the rising of the court and payment of compensation of `.1,50,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for one month. 2. The revision was filed with a petition to condone delay, on which notice was ordered to the respondent. The respondent has entered appearance, and, after hearing both sides, delay was condoned. 3. When the revision came up for consideration, in the presence of the counsel for respondent, the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submitted that he has no arguments on merits to assail the conviction, but, only as against the sentence awarding compensation of `.1,50,000/-, with a request to be made for grant of one months time to pay the compensation and, thus, avoid the default term of imprisonment. Though the learned counsel for the 1st respondent/complainant has no objection in Crl.R.P No.2512 OF 2011 2 granting one months time, modification of the sum fixed as compensation requested for is objected to contending that the cheque involved, which gave raise to the prosecution and ultimately the conviction of the accused, is dated 20-06-2005. 4. Since there is no challenge against the conviction by the revision petitioner/accused, no dilation thereof with reference to the judgments rendered by both the courts below is called for. Looking into the judgments, it is seen, the trial Magistrate has awarded compensation of `.1,00,000/-, the cheque amount, imposing a substantive term of simple imprisonment for one month. The learned Sessions Judge, in appeal, modified and limited the substantive term of imprisonment to one day, till the rising of the court, enhancing the compensation to a sum of `.1,50,000/-. Though there is some force in the submissions made by the counsel for the complainant that in view of the time lag and the expenses incurred for prosecution, more than the cheque amount has to be awarded as compensation, I find, the sum awarded in excess of the cheque amount, ie, `.50,000/-, is highly excessive and unreasonable. That is to be slashed as otherwise it would result in miscarriage of justice. Considering the time lag and also the expenses which might have been incurred by the complainant before three different forums including this court for the prosecution Crl.R.P No.2512 OF 2011 3 over the dishonoured cheque, I find, the compensation can be fixed at `.1,25,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for one month. Compensation fixed and awarded by the lower appellate court shall stand modified accordingly. 5. Affirming the conviction and sentence directing the imprisonment till the rising of the court, compensation payable to the complainant is modified and fixed at `.1,25,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for one month. Petitioner is directed to appear before the Magistrate on 01-12-2011 to serve out the imprisonment till the rising of the court, and to report payment of compensation. The learned Magistrate is directed to keep in abeyance the execution of sentence till the date fixed as above for his appearance, to enable him to pay the compensation within such period, and thus, avoid the default term of imprisonment. In default of his appearance and nonpayment of the compensation, the Magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. Revision is disposed of. Sd/- vdv S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge