IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY, 2010 / 22ND MAGHA, 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1535 of 2002 (CRA.78/1998 of SESSIONS COURT, MANJERI CC.637/1995 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PARAPPANANGADI) .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------------------- MUHAMMEDALI S/O.CHEMBAN MUHAMMEDKUTTY, CHERUVIL HOUSE, PARAMBILPEEDIKA POST, VIA. VALIMUKKE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA 2. SREE DINESAN S/O.KUMMILVEETTIL KRISHNAN, ARIYALLUR AMSOM DESOM, TIRUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.V.SHAJU FOR R2 SMT.JULIE VICTOR FOR R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHIK FOR R1. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J -------------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 1535 OF 2002 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of February, 2010 O R D E R The revision petitioner, who is the sole accused in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the N.I.Act'), approached this Court challenging his conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act with a prayer to set aside the judgments of the court below. The second respondent herein is the complainant. According to him, the allegation is that the petitioner borrowed an amount of Rs.1 lakh and to discharge the said liability, he issued a cheque which was dishonoured when presented for encashment. The Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Parappanangadi by its judgment dated 27.5.1998 in C.C.No.637 of 1995 found that the accused is guilty and accordingly, he is convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- and in default, he is further directed to undergo Crl.RP NO.1535 of 2002 :-2-: simple imprisonment for two months. It is also ordered that if the fine amount is realised, Rs.25,000/- shall be paid to the complainant under Section 357 of the Cr.P.C. In appeal, at the instance of the revision petitioner, the conviction of the revision petitioner/appellant is confirmed, but the sentence is modified as simple imprisonment for three months and a compensation for Rs.25,000/-, vide judgment dated 4.10.2002 in Crl.A.No.78 of 1998 of the Court of Sessions Judge, Manjeri. 2. Today, by a separate order in Crl.M.A.No.1177 of 2010, this Court allowed the parties to compound the offence. In the light of the compounding of the offence, I am of the view that this revision petition can be disposed of. 3. In the result, this Crl.R.P. is allowed setting aside the judgment dated 27.5.1998 in C.C.No.637 of 1998 of the J.F.C.M.Court, Parappanangadi and the judgment dated 4.10.2002 in Crl.A.No.78/1998 of the Sessions Court, Manjeri and acquitting the revision Crl.RP NO.1535 of 2002 :-3-: petitioner/accused. The Criminal Revision Petition is accordingly allowed. sd/- V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. MBS/ -TRUE COPY- P.S.TO JUDGE.