IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2009 / 16TH ASWINA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3081 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- CRL.A.NO.718/2007 OF III ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM, ST.NO.78/2007 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-IV, KOLLAM. .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------------------------------------- K.SIVARAJAN, KOCHUPLAVILA VEEDU, KIDANGAYAM NORTH MURI, NORTH PATHARAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.K.SIJU, MR.S.SUDHEESHKAR, MR.PRATHEESH.P. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THANGAL KUNJU, THAYYIL THEKKATHIL VEEDU, PATTATHANAM CHERRY, MUKUNDAPURAM P.O., KOLLAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. RITHWIK. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. ----------------------------- CRL. R.P. NO. 3081 OF 2009 -------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009 ORDER ---------- The revision petitioner is the accused in ST No. 78 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-IV, Kollam. He was prosecuted by the 1st respondent alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned Magistrate after due trial arrived a conclusion of guilty. Consequently the revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the court with a direction to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation to the first respondent. In default of payment of compensation, he was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 2. Aggrieved by the above conviction and sentence, he preferred Crl.Appeal No. 718 of 2007 before the Sessions Judge, Kollam. The learned Sessions Judge by judgment dated 28-5-2009 dismissed the appeal. 3. Aggrieved by the dismissal of appeal, this revision petition is filed. CRL. R.P. NO. 3081 OF 2009 2 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and perusing the judgment impugned, I find that the first respondent through the evidence of PW1 supported by Exts.P1 to P5 had succeeded to establish that the revision petitioner owed a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the 1st respondent and in discharge of the said liability Ext.P1 cheque dated 10-3-2004 drawn on Kollam District Co-operative Bank, Sasthamcottah branch was issued and that when Ext.P1 was sent for collection it was bounced due to insufficiency of funds and returned with Ext.P2 memo. Though demanding discharge of liability, a lawyer notice, copy of which is marked as Ext.P3 was caused, the same was returned as unclaimed. The accused failed to repay the amount. The evidence of PW1 supported by Exts.P1 to P6 was correctly analyzed by the trial court and rightly arrived a conclusion of guilty. Sentence awarded is very lenient. Direction to pay compensation is also appropriate. I find no reason to interfere with the findings of the courts below. CRL. R.P. NO. 3081 OF 2009 3 In the result the revision petition is devoid of any merit. Accordingly it is dismissed. The revision petitioner is granted six months time to deposit the compensation amount on condition he executes a bail bond for Rs. 10,000/-(Ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court. P.S.GOPINATHAN JUDGE pkk