IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2009 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3324 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- CRL.A.NO.128/2008 OF ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)III, PATHANAMTHITTA, CC.NO.NO.913/2006 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------------------------------------- REJI P.JACOB, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.LATE P.T.CHACKO, PUTHUPPALLIL HOUSE, ELANGULAM, PONKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. MR.C.B.SREEKUMAR. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. ABRAHAM MATHEW, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.P.M.MATHEW, PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE, KURUNGAZHA P.O., PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. JAYAKRISHNAN. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.3324 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October, 2009 ORDER The revision petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.913 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Pathanamthitta. The second respondent herein prosecuted the revision petitioner alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. After trial, the learned Magistrate found the revision petitioner guilty. Consequently, he was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for 5 months and a fine of Rs.1,50,000/- with a default clause to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of 3 months. 2. Aggrieved by the above conviction and sentence the revision petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No.128 of 2008 before the Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta. The learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc) Fast Track-III, to whom the appeal was made over by judgment dated 3/7/2009, dismissed the appeal. Assailing the legality, correctness and propriety of the above conviction and sentence, this revision petition was filed. Crl.R.P.No.3324 of 2009 2 3. Today when the revision petition came up for hearing, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that he is not assailing the sentence and that the liability arose out of a chitty transaction and that financial difficulties led the revision petitioner to face the prosecution and in that circumstance he is entitled to leniency in sentence and that he would pay the entire amount within six months. 4. For reasons stated above, I find no reason to interfere with the conviction under challenge. Having due regard to the special circumstances, I find that a sentence of imprisonment till rising of the court with direction to the revision petitioner to pay Rs.1,50,000/- to the second respondent as compensation under Section 357(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure would meet the ends of justice. In the event of failure to pay the compensation, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The revision petitioner is granted six months time to pay the compensation. Till that period the bond executed by the revision petitioner shall be in force. The revision petition is disposed by modifying the sentence as above. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE Skj.