IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 819 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRA.349/2009 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), TRIVANDRUM CC.470/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-V, TRIVANDRUM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED: --------------------------------------- K.JAYAKUMAR, S/O.R.KUNJUKRISHNAN, CLERK, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, BALARAMAPURAM, NOW RESIDING AT AMBUJA NIVAS, PARASSALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SHARAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE: --------------------------------- 1. JOHNY GEORGE, S/O.J.GEORGE, `SMRITHI', HOUSE NO.6, PANIKERS LANE, MANNAMOOLA, PEROORKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEK CHAND THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J ------------------------------- Crl.R.P.NO.819 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of March, 2011. ORDER The challenge in this Crl.R.P. is against the conviction and sentence imposed on the revision petitioner, who is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. As this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of conviction and sentence, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the sentence of imprisonment imposed against the revision petitioner is unreasonable and exorbitant. The petitioner may be granted sufficient time to compensate the complainant. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, I am of the view that the above submission requires positive consideration and the petitioner can be granted 45 days time to pay the fine amount fixed by the lower court . In the result, this revision petition is disposed of confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I. Act as recorded by the courts below. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court is modified and reduced into one day simple imprisonment, i.e till the rising of the court and Crl.R.P.NO.819 OF 2011 2 while confirming the direction to pay the fine, the fine amount is enhanced to the tune of Rs.80,000/- and the petitioner is granted 45 days time from today to pay the fine amount. It is made clear that the default sentence fixed by the courts below will be attracted only in case of default in paying the enhanced fine amount amount within 45 days from today. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 06.05.2011 to receive the modified sentence of imprisonment and to pay the fine amount. On realisation of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.75,000/- shall be given to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1)(b) Cr.P.C and the remaining amount of Rs.5,000/- shall be deposited in the State Exchequer. If there is any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in appearing before the trial court as directed above, the trial court is free to take coercive steps against the revision petitioner to secure his presence and to execute the sentence and for realisation of the compensation amount. Coercive steps, if any, pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till 6th May, 2011. This Crl.R.P. is disposed of accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE pm