IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2010 / 15TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2912 of 2010() -------------------------------------------- CRA.685/2008 of ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, KOTTAYAM CC.723/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ERATTUPETTA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------------ ALEXANDER FRANCIS, CHOKKADU HOUSE, IMKOMBU, MEENACHIL. BY ADV. SRI.M.J.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. SUJOY CHERIAN, KADUTHODIYIL HOUSE, KOLLAPPALLY, KADANADU, MEENACHIL. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P.N.SUMANGALA THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss V.K.MOHANAN, J. ------------------------------- Crl.R.P. No.2912 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of October, 2010. O R D E R The petitioner is the accused in a prosecution for an offence punishable u/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court found him guilty and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 4 months and to pay a fine of Rs.2 lakhs and the default sentence is fixed as simple imprisonment for 2 months. Though an appeal was filed, by judgment dated 30.4.2010 in Crl.A.No.685/08, the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge (Ad hoc)-II, Kottayam, dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and sentence. 2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that, he has no contention on merit but the revision petitioner require some time to pay the fine amount ordered by the courts below and the revision petitioner is prepared to pay the amount within one month. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that, infact the revision petitioner has already paid the 2 Crl.R.P. No.2912 of 2010 entire amount to the complainant and therefore it is submitted that the above payment may be recorded and the revision petitioner may be relieved of further payment as directed by the courts below. 3. The Apex Court in a recent decision reported in Damodar S.Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (JT 2010(4) SC 457) has held that, in the case of dishonour of cheques, the compensatory aspect of the remedy should be given priority over the punitive aspects. Therefore, I am of the view that the sentence of imprisonment ordered by the courts below can be modified and reduced to one day simple imprisonment and at the very same time, the fine amount can be enhanced to the tune of Rs.2,05,000/- and in case of default in paying the fine amount, the revision petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for 2 months. 4. The learned counsel submitted that, as the amount has already paid to the complainant, the revision petitioner may be relieved from paying Rs.2 lakhs as fine and instead of that, a 3 Crl.R.P. No.2912 of 2010 direction may be issued only to deposit Rs.5,000/- as fine in the court below, by the revision petitioner. 5. This court, in this revisional stage is not expected to go into the transaction between the complainant and the revision petitioner but it is made clear that, if the revision petitioner is able to convince the learned Magistrate of the trial court regarding the payment of Rs.2 lakhs to the complainant, by filing a memo or a statement from the part of the complainant, the trial court need not insist for the payment of Rs.2 lakhs being the fine amount and he need to deposit only Rs.5000/- being the balance amount towards fine and if there is any failure on the part of the revision petitioner or the complainant, to appraise the court regarding the payment of the fine amount, the trial court is free to take coercive steps against the revision petitioner for the realisation of the entire fine amount ordered. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 8.11.2010 to receive the modified sentence and to convince the trial court regarding the payment of Rs. 2 lakhs to the complainant as compensation 4 Crl.R.P. No.2912 of 2010 out of the fine amount and for the payment of Rs. 5000/- towards the balance of fine amount. If the petitioner fails to appraise the trial court regarding the payment of the entire fine amount, the trial court is free to take steps for the execution of the sentence and realisation of the fine amount. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. ami/