IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2008 / 24TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3387 of 2008() ----------------------------------------- CRA.667/2004 OF ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)III, TRIVANDRUM CC.23/2000 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, NEYYATINKARA .................... REVN. PETITIONER/ APPELLANT/ACCUSED; -------------------------------------------------------------- CHRISTUDAS, S/O.YESUDAS, RESIDING AT PRINCE BHAVAN, KALLUVILA, VANNIYACODE, PARASSALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.CHITAMBARESH (SR.) SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.P.S.APPU RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENTS/NOT PARTY/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. A.JNANABHARANAM, RESIDING AT BRITE HOUSE, THERUMALVILA, KARODE P.O., NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.RAVINDRA BABU FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/10/2008, ALONG WITH CRRP. NO.3384 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ........................................... CRL.R.P.NOs.3384 & 3387 OF 2008 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008 ORDER Petitioner was concurrently convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 138 of N.I.Act by Judicial First Class Magistrate, Neyyattinkara in C.C.897 of 1999 and C.C.23 of 2000 respectively. Second respondent is the same complainant in both the cases. Petitioner challenged the conviction in C.C.897 of 1999 before Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram in Crl.A.732 of 2004 and that of C.C.23 of 2000 in Crl.A.667 of 2004. Learned Sessions Judge allowed Crl.A.732 of 2004 in part, confirming the conviction but modifying the sentence to imprisonment till rising of court and a fine of Rs.2,00,000/- and in default, simple imprisonment for six months. On realisation of the fine amount, it was directed to be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Challenging the conviction in C.C.23 of 2000 Crl.A.667 of 2004 was filed. Learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to imprisonment till rising of court and a fine of Rs.36,000/- and in default, simple imprisonment for three months. On realisation of the fine, it was directed to be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Crl.R.P.3384 of 2008 is filed challenging the Crrp 3387 &3384/08 2 conviction and sentence in Crl.A.732 of 2004 and Crl.R.P.3387 of 2008 is filed challenging the conviction and sentence in Crl.A.667 of 2004. 2. Learned senior counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that petitioner is not challenging the conviction but only the sentence. Learned senior counsel submitted that petitioner is a police constable and due to the conviction and sentence, he is under suspension and he may be granted time to pay the fine and imprisonment till rising of court may be avoided. 3. On hearing the learned counsel, it is seen that the sentence in C.C.897 of 1999 was modified to imprisonment till rising of court, in addition to fine for the amount covered by the cheque with a direction to pay compensation under Section 357(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure on realisation. So long as sentence is not to be modified as against the interest of second respondent/complainant, it is not necessary to issue notice to second respondent. Interest of justice will be met, if the sentence is modified to a fine of Rs.2,10,000/- with default sentence of simple imprisonment for six months with a direction to pay on realisation, Rs.2,05,000/- as compensation to the complainant under Section 357(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Similarly, in C.C.23 of 2000, interest of justice will be met, if the sentence is modified to a fine of Rs.40,000/- with Crrp 3387 &3384/08 3 default sentence of simple imprisonment for three months with a direction to pay Rs.37,000/- as compensation to the complainant on realisation under Section 357(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. Revision petitions are allowed in part. While confirming conviction for the offence under Section 138 of N.I.Act, sentence in C.C.897 of 1999 is modified as follows. Petitioner is sentenced to a fine of Rs. 2,10,000/- and in default, simple imprisonment for six months. Petitioner is granted two months time to pay the fine. On realisation of the fine, Rs.2,05,000/- to be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioner is sentenced to a fine of Rs. 40,000/- in C.C.23 of 2000 and in default, simple imprisonment for three months. Petitioner is granted two months time to pay the fine in both cases. On realisation of fine, Rs.37,000/- to be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk/-