IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2011 / 17TH POUSHA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1990 of 2004(C) ------------------------------- (C.C.NO.289 OF 1998 OF THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (EO), ERNAKULAM). (CRL.A NO.209 OF 2003 OF IV ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM) REVN. PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/ACCUSED 1 & 4. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M/S.TEAM PAAREL, P.B.NO.504, IRINJALAKUDA, TRICHUR 680 125, REP. BY ITS PARTNER, PUNNOOSE ELIAS PAAREL. 2. PUNNOOSE ELIAS PAAREL, S/O.P.T.ELIAS, PARTNER, M/S.TEAM PAAREL, PAAREL HOUSE, R.S.ROAD, IRINJALAKUDA. BY ADV. SRI.P.RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE. ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M/S.INDUSTRIALC REDIT & DEVELOPMENT SYNDICATE LTD., ERNAKULAM BRANCH, KALANGOT TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, NORTH END, RERNAKULAM, COCHIN 682 035, REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, RAMESH.N. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.SHRIHARI R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.JAYAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ---------- Counsel for the revision petitioner absent. Counsel for the revision first respondent present. Criminal revision petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. 7.11.2011 SD/- P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE / TRUE COPY / vk P.A. TO JUDGE Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1990 of 2004(C) -------------------------------------------- CRL.M.A. NO.9177/04 IN CRL.RP.1990/2004 DISMISSED 7.1.2011 Sd/- P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.1990 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of January, 2011 ORDER Revision petitioners are accused 1 and 4 in C.C.No.289/1998 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (EO), Ernakulam and appellants in Crl.Appeal No.209/2003 of IV Addl. Sessions Court, Ernakulam. The learned Magistrate by judgment dated February 11,2003 convicted them under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced the second appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.8,50,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for four months. Out of the fine amount, if realised, Rs.8,45,000/- was ordered to be given to the complainant towards cost and compensation. Since appellant No.1 is a firm and since second appellant is its partner and is already sentenced, no separate sentence was imposed on the first appellant. There were 8 accused persons. The trial court acquitted accused 2, 3 and 5 to 8. On appeal by accused 1 and 4, the learned Sessions Judge by judgment Crl.R.P.No.1990/2004 2 dated March 15, 2004 confirmed their conviction, but reduced the sentence to fine of Rs.8,50,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for four months. Accused 1 and 4 have now come up in revision challenging their conviction and sentence. 2. When this revision petition came up for hearing today, learned counsel for the revision petitioners and the revision first respondent/complainant submitted that the matter has been settled. They filed Crl.M.A.No.2350/2011 seeking permission to compound the offence, which has been allowed by me. As the matter has been settled and the offence has been compounded, revision petition is allowed. Conviction and sentence of the revision petitioners under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act rendered by the trial court which is confirmed in appeal are set aside. Revision petitioners/accused 1 and 4 are acquitted under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. Their bail bonds are cancelled. P.Q.BARKATH ALI JUDGE sv. Crl.R.P.No.1990/2004 3