IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2008 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 937 of 2001(A) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRL.A.19/98 OF SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE IN CC.350/1996 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOZHIKODE .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------------- K.P. ALIKOYA, RAMLA MANZIL, P.O. PULIKKAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. P.T. ABDULRAHIMAN, PROPRIETOR, GIFT INDIA, HALWA BAZAAR, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKUOLAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.C.M. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.937 OF 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of April 2008 ORDER Petitioner was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act at the instance of respondent No.1 herein. The trial court found the petitioner guilty and he was accordingly convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The above order of conviction and sentence was confirmed in appeal by the sessions court. 2. The case of the complainant was that the accused had issued Exts.P1 and P2 cheques in discharge of a legally enforceable debt to the tune of Rs.6,000/-. But when the cheques were presented for encashment, they were dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the account of the accused. Though statutory notice was issued demanding payment, it did not evoke any response. Hence the complaint. 3. The defence set up by the accused was that there was no debt or liability as alleged by the complainant. But he admitted his signature in the two cheques. He also admitted that cheques happened to be issued to the complainant in connection with the business transaction between him and the complainant. The courts Crl.R.P.No.937 OF 2001 :: 2 :: below, after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, found that the defence set up by the accused was not tenable. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the materials available on record, I do not find any reason to interfere with the concurrent order of conviction. However, I am satisfied that the sentence imposed on the petitioner is a little too harsh. Therefore, the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner is modified and reduced. Petitioner shall suffer imprisonment till the rising of the court and shall remit a sum of Rs.8000/- before the trial court. He shall appear before the court below on August 12, 2008 and deposit a sum of Rs.8,000/- to be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(3) of the Code. On his appearance, the learned Magistrate shall ensure that petitioner undergoes imprisonment till the rising of the court on that day. If he fails to appear and make the deposit, the sentence imposed by the appellate court shall stand confirmed. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) jes Crl.R.P.No.937 OF 2001 :: 3 ::