IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3750 of 2008() ----------------------------------------- CRA.1198/2006 of SESSIONS COURT, TRIVANDRUM CC.519/2005 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-IV, NEYYATTINKARA .................... REVN. PETITIONER/ APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------- SUDHAKARAN NADAR, S/O. NARAYANA NADAR, AGED 70, RESIDING AT MEDAYIL VEEDU, OPPOSITE GOVT. L.P.G.S PUTHENKADU, THIRUPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMASWAMY PILLAI SRI.P.M.JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. R.S. MADHU, S/O. RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT `USHUS', THOZHUKKAL, NEYYATTINKARA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.NAZAR FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ........................................... CRL.R.P.NO. 3750 OF 2008 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008 ORDER Revision petitioner is the accused and second respondent, the complainant in C.C 519 of 2005 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Neyyattinkara. Petitioner was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month and a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- and in default, simple imprisonment for 15 days. Petitioner challenged the conviction before Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram in Crl.A.1198 of 2006. Learned Sessions Judge, on reappreciation of evidence, confirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to imprisonment till rising of court and a fine of Rs.1,50,000/- and in default, simple imprisonment for four months with a direction to pay the fine to second respondent as compensation under Section 357(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Revision petition is filed challenging the conviction and sentence. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. Learned counsel submitted that revision petitioner is not challenging the conviction or sentence, but he may be granted five months time to pay the fine. 3. Evidence was appreciated properly by learned Magistrate and learned Sessions Judge. It is established that the dishonoured cheque CRRP 3750/2008 2 was issued by revision petitioner towards payment of legally recoverable debt. Evidence also establish that cheque was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds and second respondent has complied with all the statutory formalities provided under Section 138 and 142 of N.I.Act. There is no illegality in the conviction. 4. Though learned Magistrate sentenced petitioner to simple imprisonment for one month, learned Sessions Judge modified the sentence to fine and that too, for the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. In such circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with the sentence also. 5. Revision petition is dismissed. Petitioner is granted five months time from today to pay the fine. Petitioner is directed to appear before learned Magistrate on 22.4.2009. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk/-