IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2010 / 29TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2429 of 2010() -------------------------------------------- CRA. NO.370/2008 OF ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC II) KOTTAYAM. S.T. NO.599/2006 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLAS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, ETTUMANOOR). ...... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ ACCUSED --------------------------------------------------------------------- A.K.THANKACHAN, S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY, AGED 48 YERAS, RESIDING AT ARYATTUZHATHIL HOUSE, ARPOOKARA WEST P.O.,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. T.N.RAVEENDRAN, VATTATHIL HOUSE, ARPOOKARA WEST P.O.,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686008. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESETNED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.C.A.ANUPAMAN R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.2429 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of October, 2010 ORDER The revision petitioner is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under section 138 of the N.I.Act and the trial court as well as the lower appellate court found that the accused is guilty and accordingly he is convicted and sentenced for the said offence. The challenge in this revision petition is against the above conviction and sentence. 2. Today by a separate order, in Crl.M.A.No.9796 of 2010, this court allowed the parties to compound the offence and accordingly, the composition of the said offence is recorded. The revision petitioner has also complied with the condition stipulated in the decision of the Apex Court reported in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457]. In the light of the composition of the offence between the contesting parties, I am of the view that this Crl. R.P can be allowed, acquitting the accused in terms 2 Crl.R.P.No.2429 of 2010 of Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C. 3. In the result, this Crl.Revision petition is allowed setting aside the judgment dated 19.5.2008 in S.T.No.599/06 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court- II, Ettumanoor and the judgment dated 19.2.2010 in Crl.A.No.370/08 of the court of Addl. District & Sessions (Ad hoc)-II, Kottayam and acquitting the revision petitioner of all the charges levelled against him in the above case and he is set at liberty. 4. The counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs.30,000/- in the trial court, towards the compliance of the condition imposed by the appellate court, while suspending the execution of sentence and the said amount may be permitted to withdraw by the complainant/1st respondent. If an amount of Rs.30,000/- is deposited, as submitted by the counsel for the revision petitioner, vide order dated 7.8.2010 in Crl.M.P.No.1457/10 in Crl.A.No.370/08, in the trial court and if the said amount is retained, the same shall 3 Crl.R.P.No.2429 of 2010 be released in favour of the complainant/1st respondent herein, on an application is moved in the trial court in this regard. The Crl.R.P is allowed accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE. ami/