IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI SUNDAY, THE 20TH MARCH 2011 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2572 of 2003(C) ------------------------------- CRL.A.NO.1/2000 IN ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK COURT NO.1, PALAKKAD S.T.NO.514/99 OF J.F.C.M, CHITTUR REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED --------------------- VIJAYACHANDRAN S/O.KELAPPAN, AGED YEARS, “KARTHIK NIVAS”, KALVAKULAM, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.B.N.SHIVA SHANKAR RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT --------------- 1. MURALIDHARAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN MASTER, UMA NIVAS, KOZHINJAMPARA, VALIYAVALLAMPATHI, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.ANEY PAUL THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.C.HARI RANI, J * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P.No.2572 of 2003 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of March 2011 O R D E R The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months as per judgment dated 04/12/1999 in S.T.Case No.514/99. The conviction was confirmed by the appellate court and the sentence was modified by directing the appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to the complainant and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month (vide judgment dated 05/08/2003 in Crl.A.No.01/2000). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused and the learned counsel for the 1st respondent/complainant. The learned Public Prosecutor is also heard. Crl.R.P.No.2572/03 2 3. At the time of argument, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused that the revision petitioner is not challenging the concurrent finding of conviction entered against him by the courts below for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. But, it is prayed that the substantive sentence of simple imprisonment for one month may be reduced to imprisonment till rising of court and also prayed for four months time to pay/deposit the amount of compensation. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the 1st respondent that the cheque is dated 31/10/1998 for Rs.1,00,000/-. It is further submitted that considering the lapse of 12 years after the issuance of the cheque, the amount of compensation ordered by the courts below at Rs.1,00,000/- may be enhanced and that three months time may be given to the revision petitioner to pay/deposit the amount of compensation. 5. A concurrent finding of guilty and conviction is there against the revision petitioner by the trial court as well as by the appellate court. About 12 years is already elapsed after the issuance of the disputed cheque. In the absence of challenge on Crl.R.P.No.2572/03 3 any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail. Therefore the verdict of guilty and conviction do not warrant any interference and the same is confirmed. Only the cheque amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been ordered as compensation by the appellate court. Considering the lapse of 12 years after the issuance of cheque, I find that the compensation amount ordered by the appellate court at Rs.1,00,000/- should be enhanced to Rs.1,10,000/-. The revision petitioner can be granted three months time to pay/deposit the amount of compensation (less any amount already paid/deposited) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. 6. In the result, a) This revision petition is allowed in part. b) The impugned concurrent verdict of guilty and conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are confirmed. (c) But the sentence imposed is modified and reduced. In supersession of the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner by the courts below, he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment Crl.R.P.No.2572/03 4 till rising of court. He is further directed under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to pay/deposit an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- (Rupees one lakh ten thousand only) as compensation within a period of three months and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The compensation amount, if deposited by the revision petitioner shall be released to the complainant on proper application. The petitioner shall have time till 22/6/2011 to pay/deposit the amount of compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- (less the amount if any paid/deposited) and thus avoid the default sentence. The petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on 23/06/2011 for execution of the sentence. (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge Crl.R.P.No.2572/03 5 Crl.R.P.No.2572/03 6 Crl.R.P.No.2572/03 7 M.C.HARI RANI, J Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2001 Crl.R.P.No.2572/03 8 ORDER 17th DAY OF JUNE 2001 Crl.R.P.No.2572/03 9