IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2011 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3524 of 2005() ------------------------------ CRA.36/2005 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-I), KOTTAYAM CC.575/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II(MOBILE), KOTTAYAM .................... REVN. PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------ 1. TAURUS RUBBER INDUSTRIES, VELUTHUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. A.P.ASHOKAN, MANANGING PARTNER, TAURUS RUBBER INDUSTRIES, VELUTHUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, (RESIDING AT ADATHARA HOUSE, POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR). BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVISANKAR RESPONDENTS/STATE AND COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. MALAYA IMPEX (PVT)LTD, RUBBER BHAVAN, MALAYA CORNER, M.C ROAD, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM, (REPRESENTED BY ROY JOSEPH, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER). ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM GEORGE JACOB FOR R2 SRI.C.MURALIKRISHNAN (PAYYANUR) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.C.HARI RANI, J * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P.No.3524 of 2005 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May 2011 O R D E R The revision petitioners/accused 1 and 2 stand convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court convicted accused 1 and 2 and the 2nd accused was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay compensation of Rs.1,05,000/- to the complainant under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for four months as per judgment dated 14/12/2004 in C.C.No.575/2004. The conviction was confirmed by the appellate court and the appeal was allowed in part and sentence was modified for simple imprisonment for one month under Section 138 of the N.I.Act with direction to pay Rs.1,99,853/- as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to the complainant and in default to undergo imprisonment for two months (vide judgment dated 22/08/2005 in Crl.A.No.36/2005). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioners/accused 1 and 2 and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/complainant. The learned Public Prosecutor is also Crl.R.P.No.3524/2005 2 heard. 3. At the time of argument, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioners/accused 1 and 2 that the revision petitioners are not challenging the concurrent finding of conviction entered against them by the courts below for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The revision petitioners pray for four months time to pay/deposit the amount of compensation and to modify the sentence of simple imprisonment for one month as ordered by the appellate court to imprisonment till rising of court. 4. A concurrent finding of guilty and conviction is there against the revision petitioners by the trial court as well as by the appellate court. In the absence of challenge on 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 are confirmed. The sentence is modified for imprisonment of the 2nd revision petitioner, till rising of court. This Court already directed the revision petitioners to deposit Rs.50,000/- within three months as per order dated 27/12/2005 while suspending the sentence in Crl.R.P.No.3524/2005 3 Crl.M.A.No.23238/2005. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I am inclined to grant four months time, as prayed for by the learned counsel for the revision petitioners, to pay/deposit a total amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation (less the amount if any already deposited) and in default the 2nd revision petitioner/2nd accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for three months. 5. In the result, a) This revision petition is allowed in part. b) The impugned concurrent verdict of guilty and conviction of the revision petitioners 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 petitioners by the courts below, the 2nd revision petitioner is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of court. Revision petitioners 1 and 2 are further directed under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to pay/deposit the total compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) (less the amount if any already deposited) to the complainant/before the trial court within a period of four months Crl.R.P.No.3524/2005 4 and in default the 2nd revision petitioner/2nd accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The amount in deposit, if any, and the balance amount if deposited shall be released to the complainant on proper application. The revision petitioners shall have time till 26/09/2011 to pay/deposit the total amount of compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- (less the amount if any already deposited) and thus avoid the default sentence. The 2nd revision petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on 27/09/2011 for execution of the sentence. (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge Crl.R.P.No.3524/2005 5 Crl.R.P.No.3524/2005 6 Crl.R.P.No.3524/2005 7 M.C.HARI RANI, J Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2001 ORDER Crl.R.P.No.3524/2005 8 17th DAY OF JUNE 2001 Crl.R.P.No.3524/2005 9