IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH MAY 2010 / 28TH VAISAKHA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1544 of 2010() ----------------------------------------- CRA.252/2008 of THE Addl.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FAST TRACK (ADHOC-II), KOZHIKODE ST.1358/2006 of SPECIAL J F C M COURT (MARAD CASES), KOZHIKODE .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------------ P.P.MUHAMMAD, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. P.P.ABDULLA, PALOLY PARAMBA HOUSE, PANNIYANKARA, KALLAI.P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT AND STATE ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, S/O. RAMAN NAIR, INDIRA BUILDING, M.M.ALI ROAD, KOZHIKODE-2. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY ADVS. SRI.RAJAN KUDUMBATHIL FOR R1 SMT.PUSHPALATHA M.K., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R2. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ami/ V.K.MOHANAN, J. ------------------------------- Crl. R.P.No.1544 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of May, 2010. O R D E R The accused in a prosecution for the offence punishable u/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, preferred this revision petition challenging the judgment dated 14.2.2008 in S.T.No.1358/2006 of the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (Marad cases), Kozhikode and the judgment dated 9.6.2009 in Crl.A.No.252/2008 of the Court of the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track (Ad hoc - II), Kozhikode. 2. The allegation against the accused is that, he had borrowed a sum of Rs.1 lakh and towards the discharge of the said liability, he had issued a cheque which when presented for encashment dishonoured and thereby committed the offence punishable u/s.138 of the NI Act and accordingly both the courts convicted the revision petitioner and sentenced him to undergo 2 months simple imprisonment. 3. Today by a separate order in Crl.M.A.No.4675/2010, Crl. R.P.No.1544 of 2010 2 this court allowed the parties to compound the offence and composition of the offence has been recorded. As the parties have compounded the offence, I am of the view that this revision petition can be allowed, especially by virtue of S.320(8) of Cr.P.C. In the result, this criminal revision petition is allowed setting aside the above judgment of the trial court as well as the lower appellate court and acquitting the revision petitioner from all the charges levelled against him. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. ami/