IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2011 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2429 of 2003 ------------------------------ CRA.634/2001 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR ST.3505/1997 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, KODUNGALLUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER: --------------------- T.P. RADHAKRISHNAN, THUNDANGIL HOUSE, P.O. KOORIKUZHI THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.RAJESH SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. PRADEEP RAJ, S/O. SREEDHARAN KARAYIL HOUSE,E P.O.CHAMAKKALA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRSENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.T.N.MANOJ FOR R1 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.C.HARI RANI, J ================= Crl.R.P.No.2429 OF 2003 =================== Dated this the 1st day of April 2011 O R D E R The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court as per judgment dated 28/11/2001 in S.T.No. 3505/1997 convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay Rs.35,000/- to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. within two months The appellate court allowed the appeal in part and the sentence was modified to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay Rs.38,000/- as compensation and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months vide judgment dated 2/8/2003 in Crl.Appeal No.634/2001. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor . 3. At the time of argument, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused that the revision 2429/2003 -2- petitioner is not challenging the concurrent finding of conviction entered against him by the courts below for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner also submitted that the revision petitioner has already deposited half of the cheque amount, i.e. Rs.17,500/- before the trial court as ordered by this Court on 22/9/2003 while suspending the sentence as per order in Crl.M.A.No.9703/2003. The revision petitioner is ready to deposit the balance cheque amount. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner prays that three months time may be granted to the revision petitioner to pay/deposit the balance amount and to modify the sentence of imprisonment for one month as ordered by the appellate court to imprisonment till rising of court. 4. The disputed cheque in this case is for Rs.35,000/- dated 17/5/1997. A concurrent finding of guilty and conviction is there against the revision petitioner by the trial court as well as by the appellate court. About 13 years is already elapsed after the issuance of the disputed cheque. In the absence of challenge on any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to advert to 2429/2003 -3- facts in any greater detail. Therefore, the verdict of guilty and conviction do not warrant any interference and the same is confirmed. The appellate court ordered to pay Rs.38,000/- as compensation to the complainant under Section 357(3)Cr.P.C. and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. Considering the fact that the revision petitioner has already deposited half of the cheque amount, i.e. Rs.17,500/-, I am inclined to grant three months time to pay the total compensation of Rs.38,000/- less the amount if any already deposited/paid with default sentence of simple imprisonment for two months. The sentence of simple imprisonment for one month is modified and reduced to imprisonment till rising of court. 5. In the result, a) This revision petition is allowed in part. b) The impugned concurrent verdict of guilty and conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are confirmed. (c) But the sentence imposed is modified and reduced. In supersession of the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the 2429/2003 -4- courts below, he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of court. He is further directed under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to pay/deposit the total amount of Rs.38,000/- (Rupees thirty eight thousand only) less the amount if any already deposited as compensation within three months and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The amount in deposit, if any, and the balance amount if deposited shall be released to the complainant on proper application. The petitioner shall have time till 1/7/2011 to pay/deposit the total amount of compensation of Rs.38,000/- less the amount if any already deposited and thus avoid the default sentence. The petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on 2/7/2011 for execution of the sentence. Sd/- M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE ks TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE 2429/2003 -5- 2429/2003 -6- 2429/2003 -7- M.C.HARI RANI, J 2429/2003 -8- Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2001 ORDER 17th DAY OF JUNE 2001 2429/2003 -9-