IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2009 / 23RD ASWINA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 774 of 2001() ----------------------------- CRA.611/2000 of SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM ST.235/1999 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOCHI .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED --------------------- P.M.NAZAR, S/O P.A.MOIDEENKUTTY C.C.NO.10/830 - A, AMARAVATHY COCHIN - 682 001 BY ADV. SRI.D.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT --------------- 1. C.A.SALEEM, S/O C.M.ALI RESIDING AT M.I.G. 21, FORT NAGAR FORT COCHIN, COCHIN - 682 001 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM ADV. SRI.T.P.VARGHESE FOR R1 SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.Q.BARKATH ALI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.774 OF 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of October, 2009 ORDER The revision petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.235/1999 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Kochi and appellant in Crl.Appeal No. 611/2000 of Sessions Court, Ernakulam. The revision petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- to the complainant. On appeal, his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was confirmed, but sentence was modified to the effect that he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for fifteen days and to pay compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Out of the compensation amount, Rs. 1,55,000/- was ordered to be paid to the complainant as compensation as provided under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. Now the accused has come up in revision challenging his conviction and sentence. Crl.R.P.No.774/01 Page numbers 2. The case of the revision first respondent/complainant as testified by him as PW1 and as detailed in the complaint before the trial court was that the accused borrowed Rs. 1,50,000/- from the complainant agreeing to repay the said amount with 12% interest on February 1, 1998 and to discharge that liability, on the same day, he issued the cheque - Ext.P1 drawn on the Kochi branch of Federal Bank Ltd which when presented for collection was returned dishonoured for want of sufficiency of funds in the account of the accused in the bank and that inspite of the notice - Ext.P5 dated 15-12-1998, the accused did not repay the amount which is an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. The learned Magistrate on receipt of the complaint recorded the sworn statement of the complainant PW1 and took cognizance of the case. The accused/revision petitioner on appearance before the trial court pleaded not guilty to the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. PW 1 was examined and Exts.P1 to P9 were marked on the side of the complainant before the trial court. When questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied the Crl.R.P.No.774/01 Page numbers entire transaction. No defence evidence was adduced. 4. The learned Magistrate on an appreciation of the evidence found the revision petitioner guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, convicted him thereunder and sentenced him as aforesaid. The lower appellate court confirmed his conviction and modified the sentence as aforesaid. The accused has come up in revision challenging his conviction and sentence. 5. When the revision petition came up for hearing today, counsel for the petitioner and first respondent submitted that the matter has been settled. They filed a compounding petition under Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act which was allowed by me. As the offence has been compounded, conviction and sentence of the revision petitioner by the trial court in S.T.No.235/99 which is confirmed in appeal in Crl.Appeal No.611/2000 have to be set aside. Revision petitioner/accused has to be acquitted of the charges against him. In the result, revision petition is allowed as compounded. The conviction and sentence of the revision petitioner by trial court under Crl.R.P.No.774/01 Page numbers Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act which is confirmed in appeal is set aside and the accused is acquitted under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. . His bail bonds are cancelled. P.Q.BARKATH ALI JUDGE sv. Crl.R.P.No.774/01 Page numbers