IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2008 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1265 of 2001(A) ------------------------------ CRA.54/1996 of I ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD CC.121/1994 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, PALAKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------------------- M.CHANDRAN, S/O.R.MANIKANTAN, M/S.JYOTI CONSTRUCTION AND ARUNA FURNITURE COMPANY, HARIKKARA STREET, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SMT.P.MAYA RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M/S.VISWAM FINANCIERS, 704/A, BIG BAZAAR, COIMBATORE BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER S.GOPAL, S/O.SREENIVASAN. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.C.M. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.1265 OF 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of April 2008 ORDER Petitioner was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act at the instance of respondent No.1 herein. The trial court found the petitioner guilty and he was accordingly convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. In appeal, the said order of conviction and sentence was confirmed by the Sessions Court. 2. The case of the complainant was that the accused had borrowed a sum of Rs.33,820/- on October 23, 1991 after executing a promissory note. Thereafter, he had issued Ext.P2 cheque dated February 15, 1993 for a sum of Rs.25,000/- in partial discharge of the debt. The cheque on presentation was dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the account of the accused. Though statutory demand notice was issued demanding payment, it did not evoke any response. Crl.R.P.No.1265 OF 2001 :: 2 :: 3. On the side of the complainant, PW1 and PW2 were examined and Exts.P1 to P9 were marked. There was no oral or documentary evidence on the side of the defence. 4. It was contended by the accused that he had issued Ext.P1 cheque in connection with a chitty transaction. According to him, he was a subscriber of chitty that was being conducted by M/S Viswam Chits. But as rightly noticed by the courts below, the accused did not adduce any evidence to substantiate the said contention. On the contrary, the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the complainant did satisfactorily establish that accused had issued the cheque in discharge of the liability. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the materials available on record, I do not find any reason to interfere with the concurrent order of conviction. However, since learned counsel submits that the petitioner is prepared to pay off the liability, if an opportunity is given to him, I am satisfied that the above request can be accepted. Crl.R.P.No.1265 OF 2001 :: 3 :: Therefore, the order of sentence passed by the appellate court shall stand set aside, if the petitioner appears before the trial court and remits a sum of Rs.40,000/- as compensation under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on August 8, 2008. If the petitioner appears and remits the amount, the learned Magistrate shall ensure that petitioner undergoes imprisonment till the rising of the court on that day. If the petitioner fails to appear and remit the sum of Rs.40,000/-, the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by the courts below shall stand confirmed. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) jes