IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2008 / 28TH POUSHA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 124 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRA.49/2007 of ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,FAST TRACK (ADHOC-II), KOZHIKODE ST.1810/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, THAMARASSERY .................... REVN. PETITIONER: REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------- T.P.AHAMMEDKUTTY, S/O.ABU HAJI, THALAPPOYIL KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT AND STATE ---------------------------------- 1. P.AJEET KUMAR, S/O.PRAKASH CHAND, PROPRIETOR, AJITH FINANCE AND INVESTMENTS, AMRUTHA AUTO CONSULTANCY, THAMARASSERY. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.R.P.No.124 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of January, 2008 ORDER The revision petitioner faces a sentence of S.I for a period of one year and to pay an amount of Rs.1,55,000/- as compensation and in default to undergo S.I for a period of 3 months in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The courts below concurrently came to the conclusion that the complainant has succeeded in establishing all ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Accordingly they proceeded to pass the impugned concurrent judgments. 3. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned concurrent judgments. Called upon to explain the nature of challenge which the petitioner wants to mount against the impugned concurrent judgments, the learned counsel for the petitioner only prays that leniency may be shown on the question of sentence. A deterrent substantive sentence of imprisonment may be avoided and a reasonable further time may be granted to the petitioner to make the payment and avoid the default sentence, it is requested. Crl.R.P.No.124 of 2008 2 4. I have gone through the impugned concurrent judgments. I find the verdict of guilty and conviction to be absolutely justified and unexceptionable. In the absence of challenge on any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail. 5. Coming to the question of sentence, I find merit in the prayer for leniency. I have already adverted to the principles governing imposition of sentence in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I Act in the decision reported in Anilkumar v. Shammi [2002(3) KLT 852]. I am satisfied that there are no compelling reasons which can persuade this Court to insist on imposition of any deterrent substantive sentence of imprisonment. Leniency can be shown on the question of sentence, but subject only to the compulsion of ensuring adequate and just compensation for the victim/complainant. He deserves to be compensated satisfactorily. The challenge can succeed only to the above extent. 6. In the nature of the relief which I propose to grant, it is not necessary to wait for issue and return of notice to the respondent. Crl.R.P.No.124 of 2008 3 7. In the result: a) This Crl.R.P is allowed in part; b) The impugned verdict of guilty and conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I Act are upheld; c) But the sentence imposed is modified and reduced. In supersession of the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the courts below, he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of court. He is further directed to pay under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C an amount of Rs.1,75,000/- (Rupees One lakh Seventy five thousand only) as compensation and in default to undergo S.I for a period of 3 months. If realised the entire amount shall be released to the complainant. 8. The petitioner shall have time till 29.02.08 to raise and pay the amount and avoid the default sentence. The modified sentence shall not be executed till 29.02.08. On or before 01.03.2008 the petitioner shall appear and the sureties shall produce him to serve the modified sentence hereby imposed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-