IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3485 of 2010() ------------------------------ CRA.125/2008 of SESSIONS COURT, WAYAYAD CC.8/2007 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, KALPETTA. .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): --------------------- P.KOYAMU, S/O.CHEKKU, AGED 50 YEARS, POROLLY HOUSE, POOTHAKKOLLY ESTATE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.RAFFEEKH.K RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SULAIMAN, S/O.(LATE MAMMU) AGED 40 YEARS, PULLANIKKAL HOUSE, MEPPADI P.O., VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DIST. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. ADV. SRI.JINU JOSEPH FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.11.2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P. No.3485/10 & Crl.M.A.11149/10 ----------------------------------------------- Dated 26th November, 2010. O R D E R This revision petition is filed challenging the conviction and sentence passed against revision petitioner. After trial, learned Magistrate convicted the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment till rising of court and he was also directed to pay Rs.28,500/- as compensation and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two weeks. The said conviction was confirmed by the appellate court, but the sentence was modified. The revision petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay fine of Rs.28,500/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 2. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the matter is compounded and a compounding petition is also filed. The petitioner has paid the entire amount of Rs.28,000/- to the respondent/ complainant and he accepted the same on 20.11.2010. He has also paid the amount of Rs.4,275/- which is 15% of the cheque amount, which is to be paid before the Legal Service Authority, in the light of the Crl.R.P. No.3485/10 2 recent decision of the Supreme Court, it is submitted. It is also submitted that warrant was issued and the petitioner was arrested and remanded. 3. On hearing both sides and considering the facts discussed above, I find that compounding, as prayed for can be allowed and I do so. In the result, the following order is passed : (i) The composition is allowed under Section 320(5) of Criminal Procedure Code. (ii) The revision petitioner is treated as acquitted of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, by virtue of Section 320(8) of the Code. (iii) Registry shall issue release memo forthwith. The revision petition and Crl.M.A.11149/10 are allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs