IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2011 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1547 of 2011(C) ------------------------------ (AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 16.6.2009 IN S.T.No.5/2009 OF JFCM-III, NEDUMANGAD) REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------------------------------------- T.SASIDHARAN S/O.NARAYANAN, AGED 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT RADHIKA BHAVAN, PERAYATHUMUGHAL, PIRAPPANCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.AYYAPPAN SANKAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT AND STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPRATIVE BANK LTD., VEMBAYAM BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER - 695001 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.G.RADHAKRISHAN,SC,FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. V. TEK CHAND FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1547 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE: ANNEXURE 1: RECEIPTS (3 Nos) DATED 10.5.2011 ISSUED BY THE COMPLAINANT BANK AND THE CERTIFICATE DATED 11.5.2011 ISSUED FROM THE BANK. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE. Kp/ V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 1547 of 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of June, 2011 ORDER The revision petitioner is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under section 138 of the N.I.Act and the trial court as well as the lower appellate court found that the accused is guilty and accordingly he is convicted and sentenced for the said offence. Today as per the order in Crl.M.A.No.5474/11, this Court permitted the parties to compound the offence and accordingly, the compounding of the offence is recorded. The revision petitioner has also complied with the condition of paying cost, as fixed by this Court, on the basis of the guideline issued by the Apex Court in the decision reported in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457]. In the light of the composition of the offence between the contesting parties, I am of the view that this Crl. R.P can be allowed, acquitting the accused in terms of Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C. In the light of the Crl.R.P.No.1547 of 2011 : 2 : amicable settlement of the dispute between the parties, and this court permitted the composition of the offence, the revision petitioner is entitled to get an acquittal of the offence for which he is charged and convicted, by virtue of Section 320(8) Cr.P.C.. 4. In the result, this Crl.R.P. is allowed setting aside the judgment dated 16.6.2009 in S.T.No.5/2009 of the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Nedumangadu and the judgment dated 17.4.2010 in Crl.A.No.83/2010 of the Court of the Addl.Sessions Judge Fast Track-1 (Vacation Judge) Thiruvananthapuram and acquitting the revision petitioner/accused of all the charges levelled against him and, accordingly, he is set at liberty. As the petitioner, who is now undergoing imprisonment pursuant to the judgment impugned in this Revision petition, is acquitted, he is entitled to get released from the jail forthwith, if he is not required in any other case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an order may be issued to the Superintendent, Central Prison, Thiruvananthapuram Crl.R.P.No.1547 of 2011 : 3 : directing him to release the petitioner. As the petitioner is acquitted of all the charges levelled against him by the above order, the registry is directed to forward the gist of this order to the Superintendent, Central Prison Thiruvananthapuram, for further action. V.K.Mohanan, Judge. kp/ Crl.R.P.No.1547 of 2011 : 4 : V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.A.No.5474 of 2011 in Crl.R.P.No. 1547 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of June, 2011. ORDER This is a petition filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I.Act') to compound the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. The dispute is the subject matter of the Crl.R.P. In the petition, it is stated that now the matter has been permanently settled between the parties and the petitioner has already remitted all the dues to the complainant including the cheque amount in this case. 2. I have gone through the compounding petition and I am satisfied with the terms and conditions incorporated therein and the petition is signed by both the revision petitioner and the second respondent/ complainant and countersigned by their respective counsel. Considering the particular facts and circumstances involved in the case, especially, in the light of the discretion granted to this Court by the Apex Court in the decision reported in Crl.R.P.No.1547 of 2011 : 5 : Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457], the revision petitioner was permitted to file the compounding petition depositing Rs.600/- of the cheque amount, as per order dated 15.6.2011 so as to enable him to move this Court to compound the offence for which he is convicted and sentenced. The revision petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.600/- Kerala State Legal Services Authority, vide Receipt No.325 dated 15.6.2011 in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court. As I am satisfied with the terms and the averments contained in the compounding petition, which is signed by the revision petitioner as well as the second respondent and countersigned by their respective counsel, permission is granted to compound the above offence and the composition is recorded. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE Kp/