IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2009 / 16TH ASWINA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3131 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- CRL.A.NO.168/2008 OF ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA, CC.NO.32/2008 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT NO.II, RANNI. .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------------------------------------- M.S.SASTHAR, MAROTTIPATHALIL HOUSE, PAZHAVANGADI VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK. BY ADV. MR.V.SETHUNATH. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ABRAHAM.P.THOMAS, PALANILKKUNNATHIL HOUSE, ANGADI, RANNI. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. RITHWIK. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.S. GOPINATHAN, J. ------------------------------- CRL. R.P. NO. 3131 OF 2009 -------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009 ORDER --------- The revision petitioner is the accused in C.C No. 32 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Ranni. The 1st respondent herein prosecuted the revision petitioner alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned Magistrate after due trial arrived a conclusion of guilty. Consequently he was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months with a direction to pay Rs. 25,000/- as compensation to the first respondent. In default of payment of compensation, he was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of three months. 2. Aggrieved by the above conviction and sentence, he preferred Crl.Appeal No. 168 of 2008 before the Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta. The learned Additional Sessions Judge to whom the appeal was made over, by judgment dated 29-6-2009 confirmed the conviction. But the sentence was reduced to simple CRL. R.P. NO. 3131 OF 2009 2 imprisonment for three months. The order of the trial court awarding compensation of Rs. 25,000/- was also confirmed. 3. Assailing the above conviction and sentence as modified in appeal, this revision petition was filed. 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and perusing the judgments of the courts below, I find that the first respondent through his evidence as PW1 supported by Exts.P1 to P10 had succeeded to establish that the revision petitioner owed a sum of Rs. 25,000/- to the 1st respondent and that in discharge of the said liability, Ext.P1 cheque dated 21-11-2005 drawn on the Pazhavangadikara Service Co-operative Bank, Ranny branch was issued and that when Ext.P1 cheque was presented for collection, it was bounced with endorsement 'Not arranged for'. Demanding discharge of the liability, a lawyer notice, copy of which is marked as Ext.P4 dated 2-12-2005 was caused. Despite the acceptance of the notice as evidenced by Ext.P5 acknowledgment card, the liability was not discharged. CRL. R.P. NO. 3131 OF 2009 3 The evidence of PW1 remains uncontroverted. Revision petitioner has no good defence other than the total denial. I find no reason to disbelieve PW1 or to reject the documents. The evidence of PW1 supported by Exts.P1 to P10 was correctly analyzed by the courts below and rightly arrived a conclusion of guilty. I find no error, illegality or impropriety committed by the courts below in arriving a conclusion of guilty and consequent conviction. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the revision petitioner is a man without any avocation , I find that the revision petitioner is entitled to a little more leniency in sentence and that a sentence of imprisonment till rising of the court with direction to pay compensation would meet the ends of justice. In the result, the revision petition is allowed in part. While confirming the conviction, the substantive sentence is reduced to imprisonment till rising of the court. The direction to pay compensation with default clause is sustained. The revision CRL. R.P. NO. 3131 OF 2009 4 petitioner is granted two months time to pay the compensation provided he executes a bail bond for Rs. 10,000/- with two solvent sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court. P.S. GOPINATHAN JUDGE PKK