IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2009 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 178 of 2007(E) ------------------------------ CRA.209/2005 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM CC.1094/2000 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II(MOBILE), KOTTAYAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- JOSE, S/O. JOSEPH, EPRA VEEDU, ERUMPOONNIKARA, ERUMELI, KANJIRAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ----------------------------------------------- 1. RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI, PUTHIYAPARAMBIL VEEDU, NEDUMKUNNAM P.O., CHANGANACHERRY. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P. RAVEENDRA BABU FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Crl.R.P. No. 178 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 7th day of April, 2009 O R D E R The accused in C.C. No.1094/2000 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate,-II (Mobile), Kottayam for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him concurrently by the courts below. 2. Pending this revision, the parties have settled the matter. Crl. M.A. No.3153 of 2009 has been filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 seeking permission to record the composition entered into between the revision petitioner and the complainant. The said petition has been signed by both the revision petitioner as well as the complainant and their respective counsels. In the light of this development, the aforementioned composition is recorded and it will have the effect of an acquittal of the revision petitioner within the meaning of Sec. 320 (8) Cr.P.C. Money, if any, deposited by the revision petitioner pursuant to the orders, if any, passed by the superior courts shall be refunded to the revision petitioner/accused. This Crl. R.P. is disposed of as above. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. mn.