IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2008 / 20TH CHAITHRA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 730 of 2001 ------------------------------------ CRA.82/1998 of Vth ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM CC.1240/1994 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------------------------------- M.S.THOMMICHAN KALATHINGAL COURT PADAMUGAL SATERLIGHT TOWNSHOP KAKKANADU-P.O. ERNAKULAM BY ADV. SRI.SHABU SREEDHARAN SRI.ALBERT JOSEPH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SAJITH WALTER MILL VIEW, MILL LANE PALLIMUKKU, KOCHI (POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF SOBHAMANI) 2. STATE OF KEALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJETH ALI THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.730 OF 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of April 2008 ORDER When this petition is taken up for hearing today, petitioner and his counsel are absent. 2. However, I have carefully gone through the entire records. Petitioner was concurrently found guilty by the trial court as well as the appellate court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The case of the complainant was that the accused, acting as an agent of the complainant in the business of shares, had issued Ext.P2 cheque for Rs.1,30,000/- in discharge of a legally recoverable liability. When the cheque was presented for encashment, it was dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the account of the accused. The statutory demand notice did not evoke any response. 3. Pws1 to 3 were examined on the side of the complainant and Exts.P1 to P9 were marked on his side. There was no oral or documentary evidence on the side of the accused. 4. The trial court, after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence, found the petitioner guilty and he was Crl.R.P.No.730 OF 2001 :: 2 :: accordingly convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,40,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. It was further directed that Rs.1,35,000/- shall be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The above order of conviction and sentence was confirmed in appeal by the Sessions Court. Having perused the materials available on record, I do not find any reason to interfere with the concurrent order passed by the courts below. The case of the accused that he had issued two blank cheques at the time when he had successfully bid in the chitty auction and that one of the two cheques was used for launching the present prosecution was disbelieved. The courts below had repelled the above contention particularly since the accused had failed to substantiate it through any cogent evidence. The courts below, in my view, were justified in holding the petitioner guilty. There is no merit in the revision petition. It is accordingly dismissed. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) jes Crl.R.P.No.730 OF 2001 :: 3 :: A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.730 OF 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ORDER Dated 9th April 2008