IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3758 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRA.95/2009 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-III), PARAVUR ST.3827/2005 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRAST CLASS - II, PARAVUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: -------------------------------- C.S SREEKUTTAN PROPRIETOR, SREEKUTTAN & COMPANY CHUNKATH HOUSE, CHERIYAPALLAMTHIURUTH PARAVUR VILLAGE BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 2. P. D DINAMANI PARUTHIYEZHATH HOUSE MAKKANAI, MANNAM PO N PARAVUR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: SRI JAYAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.S.GOPINATHAN,J. ----------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.3758 of 2009 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2009 ORDER The revision petitioner was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, North Paravur in S.T.No.3827 of 2005 on her file and sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the court and a fine of Rs.1,50,000/-. Fine, if realised was ordered to be paid as compensation to the second respondent who is the complainant before the trial court. In appeal, the conviction and sentence were confirmed. The compensation to be paid to the first respondent was reduced to Rupees one lakh. Now this revision. 2. Today when the revision petitioner came up for admission, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that he is not assailing the conviction. But the sentence is assailed. According to the learned counsel, the trial court has imposed a fine of Rs.1,50,000/-, though the cheque was only for Rupees one lakh and the same was ordered to be paid as compensation to the first respondent. In appeal, the compensation was reduced to Rupees one lakh. It is submitted that the balance amount shall go to the State and it is not Crl.R.P.No.3758 of 2009 2 justified. I do not find any error, impropriety or illegality in imposing fine within the statutory provision and crediting balance, after paying compensation, to the State fund. However, I find that the revision petitioner is entitled to a little more leniency and that a fine of Rs.1,10,000/- would meet the ends of justice. In the result, this revision petition is allowed in part. While confirming the substantive sentence, the fine is reduced to Rs.1,10,000/- with default sentence as ordered by the trial court. Fine, if realised, Rs.1,00,000/- shall be given as compensation to the second respondent. The revision petitioner is granted six months time to pay the fine. Till then, the bail bond executed by him shall remain in force. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE skj.