IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2008 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 4012 of 2008() ---------------------------------------------- CRA.532/2006 of I ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD ST.1256/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PATTAMBI .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------- K.P.VALSALAKUMARI, W/O.K.VASUDEVAN, TEACHER, A.U.P.SCHOOL KARAMBATHOOR PO., PALLIPURAM, PATTAMBI. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT ------------------------- 1. SASIKUMAR, S/O.UNNIKRISHNA PANICKER APPADATHU VEEDU, NAYYUR DESOM, ANAKKARA OTTAPPALAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.RAVEENDRA BABU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. -------------------------------------------------- Crl.Revision Petition No. 4012 of 2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of December, 2008 O R D E R Revision Petitioner is the accused and first respondent the complainant in S.T.No.1256/2004 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Pattambi. Revision Petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. It was challenged before the First Additional Sessions Court, Palakkad in Criminal Appeal No.532/2006. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on re-appreciation of evidence confirmed the conviction and modified the sentence to pay a fine of Rs.1,10,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. On realization of fine, Rupees one lakh is to be paid to the first respondent as compensation. Revision petition is filed challenging the conviction and sentence. Crl.R.P.No.4012/2008 - 2 - 2. Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner was heard. Learned counsel submitted that, in view of the evidence on record and the concurrent findings of facts, revision petitioner is not challenging the conviction or sentence. But revision petitioner may be granted six months' time to pay the fine. 3. On hearing the learned counsel and going through the judgments of the courts below, I find no reason to interfere with the conviction. Courts below, on proper appreciation of evidence, found that Exhibit P1 cheque was issued by the revision petitioner towards repayment of Rs.1,00,000/- due from the revision petitioner. Exhibit P1 cheque, when presented for encashment, was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds. It is also proved that first respondent had complied with all statutory formalities provided under Sections 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Hence, conviction of the revision Crl.R.P.No.4012/2008 - 3 - petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is perfectly legal. 4. Learned Sessions Judge modified the sentence only to a fine and that to Rs.10,000/- is in excess of the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. In such circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with the sentence also. Revision petition is dismissed. Revision Petitioner is granted six months' time to pay the fine. Sd/- M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE skr // True copy // P.A. to Judge.