IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1605 of 2011() ------------------------------ CRA.97/2008 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), PATHANAMTHITTA ST.2/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT- II,PATHANAMTHITTA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): --------------------- V.N.JANARDANAN PARAYIL HOUSE, VAKAYAR PO, MANGARAM MURI, KONNI VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERY THALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.E.M.MURUGAN SRI.P.R.PRATEESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THANKACHAN, CHARIVUKALAYIL HOUSE, VAKAYAR PO, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.T.K.BIJU (MANJINIKARA) FOR R-1 SMT.ANNIE M.ABRAHAM FOR R-1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RAJESH THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: pm S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 1605 of 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2011 ORDER Revision is by the accused in a cheque case, who has been convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, (for short the N.I.Act), concurrently by the two Courts below. Sentence imposed against the accused as modified by the Sessions Judge in appeal is imprisonment for three months with direction to pay Rs.50,000/- as fine with default term of simple imprisonment for one month more. 2. Notice given first respondent has entered appearance. 3. When the revision came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused submitted that he has no arguments on merits but only against the sentence imposing substantive term of imprisonment as part of the punishment imposed. A request is also made by the counsel for some more time to pay the fine and thus avoid the default term of imprisonment. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/complainant has no objection in modifying the sentence and also granting reasonable time for payment as deemed fit and proper by this Court. Crl.R.P.No. 1605 of 2011 2 4. The offence for which the accused was convicted arose on dishonour of a cheque, issued by him. Though the statute provides for imprisonment for a term when the drawer of such cheque is found guilty of the offence, having regard to the nature of the offence, the ends of justice would suffice if the punishment provided is compensatory than of punitive nature. In the absence of exceptional circumstance involved in the case, for an offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act incarceration of such offender for a term in prison is not called for. Sentence imposed against the accused can be reduced to imprisonment till rising of the court retaining the fine fixed and awarded with the default term of imprisonment. 5. Affirming the conviction sentence imposed against the accused is modified and reduced to imprisonment till rising of the court retaining the fine fixed with the default term of imprisonment. Petitioner shall appear before the Magistrate on 12.12.2011 to serve out the imprisonment till rising of the court and to report the payment of fine. The Magistrate is directed to keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence against the accused till the date fixed as above for his appearance. In Crl.R.P.No. 1605 of 2011 3 default of his appearance and non-payment of the fine, the magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. Revision disposed of. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. Rkc //True Copy// PA to Judge