IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3220 of 2005() ------------------------------ CRA.190/2002 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), KALPETTA CC.434/1999 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, SULTHANBATHERY .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: --------------------------------------------- SADANANDAN, S/O.KUNHIKANNAN, NEAR NEW POST OFFICE, TELLICHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. O.P.JACOB, S/O.POULOSE, OILIKKAMALIL HOUSE, KUPPADI AMSOM AND DESOM, WITHIN THE LIMITS OF SULTHAN BATHERY POLICE STATION. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/09/2008, ALONG WITH CRRP NO. 3221 OF 2005 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ============== Crl.R.P.Nos.3220 & 3221 of 2008 ==================== Dated this the 1st day of September, 2008. O R D E R The accused in C.C.Nos.434/1999 and 474/1999, on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Sultan Batheri, is the petitioner in these two criminal revision petitions. He challenges the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, by the trial court and confirming the order, by the Additional Sessions Judge (ADHOC)-I, Kalpetta, with a modification of the sentence. Finding the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the trial court had sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The appellate court modified the same by sentencing him to simple imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay compensation of Rs.75,000/- under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. with a default sentence of simple imprisonment of three months. The same has been challenged in this revision. Crl.R.P.Nos.3220 & 3221 of 2008 2 2. I heard learned counsel for the accused and the complainant. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned counsel for the accused confined his submissions to the sentence and inter alia, pointed out that though a liberal view may be taken as to the direction to pay compensation, since the amount for the cheque was only Rs.65,000/-, the court below should not have directed payment in excess of Rs. 65,000/-. In my view, the said submission seems to be justified, in the facts and circumstances of the case I hasten to add there was nothing illegal with the appellate court directing compensation to the tune of Rs.75,000/- under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. 4. In these circumstances, the criminal revision petitions are allowed in part and the sentence imposed is modified to the following effect: The petitioner/accused is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment till rising of the court and pay compensation of Rs.65,000/- to the complainant under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. The accused shall be given further period of three months to pay Crl.R.P.Nos.3220 & 3221 of 2008 3 the entire balance amount due by way of compensation. The amount paid by the accused pursuant to the order of this Court shall be given credit to the court below. The accused shall appear before the court below on 17.11.2008 to undergo the period of imprisonment as directed therein. V.GIRI, JUDGE bkn/-