IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH APRIL 2011 / 22ND CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 61 of 2011() ---------------------------- COMMON JUDGMENT IN CRA.1047/2008 & 1048/2010 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, (ADHOC-1), ERNAKULAM COMMON JUDGMENT IN CC.851/2005 & 852/10 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOCHI .................... REVN. PETITIONERS: REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ---------------------------------------------------------- O.P.JOHN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.PAILEE, OLATTUPURATH HOUSE, PALLIPURAM P.O., MUNAMBAM, KUZHUPULLY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAN THAMPI RESPONDENTS: STATE/COMPLAINANT -------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. M.A.MAJEED, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.ABDU, MANZILA MANZIL, H.NO.13/514, KOCHANGADI, KOCHI - 5. R1 BY P.P. SRI V. TEK CHAND. R2 BY ADV. SRI.ADEEP ANWAR & SRI PRAVEEN K. JOY THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.4.2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl. R.P. No.61 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated 12th Day of April, 2011 ORDER The revision petitioner is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under section 138 of the N.I.Act and the trial court as well as the lower appellate court found that the accused is guilty and accordingly he is convicted and sentenced for the said offence. 2. Today by a separate order, in Crl.M.A.No. 3514/2011, this court allowed the parties to compound the offence and accordingly, the composition of the said offence is recorded. The revision petitioner has also complied with the condition of paying cost, as fixed by this Court, on the basis of the guideline issued by the Apex Court in the decision reported in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457]. In the light of the composition of the offence between the contesting parties, I am of the view that this Crl. R.P can be allowed, acquitting the accused in terms of Section 320(8) of CRRP 61/11 2 Cr.P.C. 3. In the result, this Crl.Revision petition is allowed setting aside the judgment dated 11.11.2008 in C.C.No.851 & 852 of 2005 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court- II, Kochi and the judgment dated 16.9.2010 in Crl.A.Nos.1047/2008 & 1048/2008 of the court of Addl.Sessions Judge (Adhoc-1), Ernakulam and acquitting the revision petitioner of all the charges levelled against him in the above case and he is set at liberty. 4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that in pursuance of the judgments of the courts below, the revision petitioner has already been arrested and detained in the Sub Jail, Mattancherry. As this court allowed the Crl.R.P. and acquitted the revision petitioner, he is entitled to get released from jail forthwith. Therefore, the Registry of this Court is directed to forward the gist of the this order to the jail authorities , namely, the Superintendent , Sub Jail, Mattancherry to release the CRRP 61/11 3 revision petitioner forthwith, if he is not required in any other case, in the light of the above order of acquittal. The Crl.R.P is allowed accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/-