IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2387 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRA.690/2007 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM ST.49/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, CHENGANACHERRY .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- P.S.GANESH, M/S ALANKAR JEWELLERS, SCS JUNCTION, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUNNY CHERIAN, KOLLAMPARAMBIL, PERUMPANACHI, CHANGANASSERY. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI JAYAKRISHNAN FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2009, ALONG WITH CRL.R.P.NO.2388/2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.Nos.2387 of 2009 & 2388 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of July, 2009. ORDER Public Prosecutor takes notice for respondent No.1. Notice to respondent No. 2 is dispensed with in view of the order I am proposing to pass in these revisions which is not prejudicial to him. 2. These revisions arise from conviction and sentence of petitioner entered in separate trials for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, “the Act”). Petitioner faced trial in S.T.Nos.49 of 2007 and 106 of 2007 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kodungallur. Case of respondent No.2 in S.T.No.49 of 2007 is that petitioner borrowed Rs.40,000/- from him and for repayment of that amount issued Ext.P1, cheque dated 14.10.2004. Dishonour of that cheque as alleged by respondent No.2 is proved by Exts.P2 and P3. Service of statutory notice on petitioner is proved by Exts.P4 to P6. Case of respondent No.2 in S.T.No.106 of 2007 is that petitioner borrowed Rs.50,000/- from him and for repayment of that amount issued Ext.P1, cheque dated 14.10.2004. Dishonour of that cheque as alleged by respondent No.2 is proved by Exts.P2 and P3. Service of statutory notice on petitioner is proved by Exts.P4 to P6. 3. In both cases respondent No.2 gave evidence as PW1 and Crl.R.P.Nos.2387 & 2388/2009 2 testified to his case. According to the petitioner he discharged the liability but inspite of that, cheques are misused. Petitioner does not dispute seriously the transaction or execution of the cheque. There is no evidence to prove or probabilise discharge pleaded by him. Petitioner did not respond to the notice. As such there is no reason to differ from the finding entered by the courts below. 4. Substantive sentence awarded by learned magistrate in both cases has been modified by the appellate court as simple imprisonment till rising of the court. Learned Sessions Judge also sentenced the petitioner to pay fine of Rs.40,000/- and Rs.50,000/- respectively, in each case with direction that fine if realized will be given to respondent No.1 as compensation. A default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month each is also provided. Having regard to the nature of offence and amount involved there is no reason to interfere with the substantive sentence, sentence of fine or default sentence at the instance of petitioner. 5. Learned counsel requested that petitioner may be granted six months’ time to deposit fine. Counsel states that petitioner is in financially difficult situation and is involved in other similar cases. Having regard to the circumstances stated by learned counsel I am inclined to grant time till 30.12.2009 to the petitioner to deposit fine. Crl.R.P.Nos.2387 & 2388/2009 3 Resultantly these revisions fail and are dismissed. Petitioner is granted time in both cases till 30.12.2009 to deposit fine ordered in those cases. Petitioner shall appear in the trial court on 31.12.2009 to receive the sentence. Execution of warrant if any against the petitioner will stand in abeyance till 31.12.2009. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks