IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1915 of 2010() ------------------------------ CRA.572/2009 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, (ADHOC-I), ERNAKULAM CC.157/2008 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS – II, PERUMBAVOOR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED :- ------------------------------------------------------------------- T.N.SASI, S/O.NEELAKANDAN NAIR, PULINATTU HOSUE, AIMURY P.O.,MUDAKKUZHA, PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.V.S.AFSAL KHAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT :- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. B.BABU, CHITHRAM, THETTUKATTU LANE, PERUMBAVOOR, 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESETNED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.M.R.VENUGOPAL FOR R2. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: jvt V.K.MOHANAN, J. ----------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.1915 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of June 2010 O R D E R The accused in a prosecution for an offence u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is the revision petitioner, as he is aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence imposed by the courts below. 2. The case of the complainant is that the accused/revision petitioner, towards the discharge of a debt due to the complainant, issued a cheque dated 3.8.2006 for Rs.37,000/-, which when presented for encashment dishonoured and the cheque amount was not repaid in spite of a formal demand notice and thus the revision petitioner has committed the offence punishable u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. With the said allegation, the Crl.R.P.No.1915 of 2010 : 2 : complainant approached the Judicial First Class Magistrate- II, Perumbavoor by filing a formal complaint, upon which cognizance was taken u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and instituted C.C.No.157/08. During the trial of the case, PW1 was examined from the side of the complainant and Exts.P1 to P5 were marked. No evidence either oral or documentary adduced from the side of the defence. On the basis of the available materials and evidence on record, the trial court has found that the cheque in question was issued by the revision petitioner/accused for the purpose of discharging his debt due to the complainant. Thus accordingly the court held that, the complainant has established the case against the accused/revision petitioner and consequently found that the accused is guilty and thus convicted him u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. On such conviction, the trial court sentenced the revision petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months Crl.R.P.No.1915 of 2010 : 3 : and also directed to pay compensation of Rs.37,000/- and the default sentence is fixed as 3 months. 3. In appeal, at the instance of the revision petitioner/ accused, by judgment dated 24.2.2010 in Crl.A.572/09 of the Court of Addl.Sessions Judge (Adhoc-I), Ernakulam confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court is modified and reduced the sentence of simple imprisonment till rising of the court and also directed to pay fine of Rs.40,000/- and the default sentence is fixed as 2 months simple imprisonment. It is also ordered that on realization of the fine amount, the same shall be paid to the complainant under Sec.357(1) of Cr.P.C. 4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and also perused the judgments of the courts below. 5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that some breathing time may be granted to deposit the fine amount. According to me, the said Crl.R.P.No.1915 of 2010 : 4 : submission can be considered favourably but subject to slight enhancement in the fine amount. In the result, this revision petition is disposed of confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and while maintaining the sentence of imprisonment ordered by the lower appellate court the amount of fine is enhanced to the tune of Rs.42,500/- and in default he is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for 4 months. On realization of the fine amount the entire amount shall be paid to the complainant under Sec.357(1) of Cr.P.C. Accordingly the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 24th September, 2010 to pay the fine amount as directed by this court. In case any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in appearing before the court below as directed above and in making the deposit of fine amount, the trial court is free to take coercive steps to secure the presence of the revision petitioner and to execute the Crl.R.P.No.1915 of 2010 : 5 : sentence awarded against the revision petitioner. The execution of warrant, if any, pending against the revision petitioner, shall be deferred till 24.9.2010. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE. Jvt