IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2010 / 5TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2511 of 2010() ------------------------------ CRA.363/2007 of I ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM CC.56/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, PUNALUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------------ K.R.SREEKUMAR, KUNNAMPALLY, AYANIVELIKULANGARA P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.P.SIVARAJ RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. D.RAJAN, RAJU MANDIRAM, AGASTHYACODE, ANCHAL. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.BENNY VARGHESE THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. ------------------------------ Crl.R.P.No. 2511 OF 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of August, 2010 ORDER The Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-IV, Punalur in C.C.No.56/2006, on her file convicted the revision petitioner for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to simple imprisonment for 7 months and ordered to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation to the 2nd respondent. Though he preferred Crl.Appeal No.363/2007 he was not successful. Now this revision petition. 2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that he is not assailing the conviction, but sentence is assailed. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner who is aged 50 years, is a School Manager and because of the financial difficulties he has to face the prosecution and he is prepared to discharge his liability and sought time. With this submission, the learned counsel sought for lenient sentence. Having heard the learned counsel and perusing the judgment under challenge, I find some merit in the submission made by the learned counsel and that a sentence of imprisonment till the rising of the court and a fine of Rs.2,05,000/- (Rupees Two Crl.R.P.No. 2511 OF 2010 : 2 : Lakhs and Five Thousand only) would meet the ends of justice. 3. In the result, this revision petition is allowed in part. While confirming the conviction, the sentence is reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and fine of Rs.2,05,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the revision petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The fine amount, if realised, Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) shall be paid to the 2nd respondent as compensation under Section 357(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The revision petitioner is granted 6 months time to remit the fine amount. In the event, there is any direct payment to the 2nd respondent not exceeding Rs.2,00,000/-, that shall be given credit to. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE dmb