IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 4133 OF 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.125/2007 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, KOTTAYAM ST.1547/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KOTTAYAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: --------------------- P.K. RAJENDRAN, PELLAVIL HOUSE, CHELAKOMPU P.O., KARUKACHAL. BY ADV. SRI.B.PREMOD SRI.SUDHEER GANESH KUMAR.R. RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 2. T.R.VIJAYAKUMAR, THADATHUMKUZHIYIL, THIRUNAKKARA P.O. KOTTAYAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. NAZAR FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P. NO. 4133 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of December, 2008 O R D E R Revision petitioner is the accused and first respondent the complainant in S.T.1547 of 2005 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kottayam. Revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. He challenged the conviction before Additional Sessions Court, Kottayam in Crl. Appeal 125 of 2007. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on reappreciation of evidence confirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to imprisonment till rising of Court and a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default simple imprisonment for four months with a direction to pay the fine on realisation to first respondent as compensation. Revision is filed challenging the conviction. 2. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioner is not challenging the conviction or sentence but only seeks time for payment of the amount. 3. On going through the judgments of the Courts below, I find no reason to interfere with the conviction or the sentence. CRRP4133/08 2 Evidence establish that revision petitioner issued the dishonoured cheque towards the discharge of a legal liability and it was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds and first respondent had complied with all the statutory formalities provided under section 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Learned Sessions Judge modified the sentence to imprisonment till rising of Court and fine which was only for the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. In such circumstances there is no merit in the revision. Revision is dismissed. Revision petitioner is granted five months time to pay the fine. Revision petitioner is directed to appear before the Magistrate on 20.5.2009. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Okb/-