IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2011 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1382 of 2009() ------------------------------------ CRA.409/2006 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), TRIVANDRUM ST.298/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, VARKALA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------------- SHAJIRA, D/O.JALALUDEEN, AZEEM MANZIL, EDAVA VILLAGE, PANAYAL, EDAVA P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. ASHOK KUMAR, S/O.VASU, CHARUVILA VEEDU, VENKULAM, EDAVA P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.ANEY PAUL R2 BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs M.C.HARI RANI, J * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P.No.1382 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of April 2011 O R D E R The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court convicted and sentenced her to undergo simple imprisonment for four months and to pay compensation of Rs.60,000/- to the complainant under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for twenty days as per judgment dated 28/4/2006 in S.T.No.298/2006. The conviction and sentence ordered by the trial court was confirmed by the appellate court (vide judgment dated 21/03/2009 in Crl.A.No.409/2006). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/complainant. The learned Public Prosecutor is also heard. 3. At the time of argument, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused that the revision petitioner is not challenging the concurrent finding of conviction Crl.R.P.No.1382/09 2 entered against her by the courts below for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The revision petitioner prays four months time to pay/deposit the amount of compensation and to modify the sentence of simple imprisonment for four months to imprisonment till rising of court. 4. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/complainant submitted that three months time can be granted to the revision petitioner; but the compensation amount may be enhanced. 5. The disputed cheque in this case is for Rs.60,000/- dated 23/11/2004. A concurrent finding of guilty and conviction is there against the revision petitioner by the trial court as well as by the appellate court. In the absence of challenge on any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail. Therefore the verdict of guilty and conviction do not warrant any interference and the same is confirmed. Only the cheque amount of Rs.60,000/- has been ordered as compensation by the courts below. Considering the expiry of six years after the issuance of the disputed cheque, the Crl.R.P.No.1382/09 3 compensation amount ordered by the courts below at Rs.60,000/- should be enhanced to Rs.65,000/-. It was ordered by this Court on 24/4/2009 while suspending the sentence as per order in Crl.M.A.No.4117/2009 to deposit half of the cheque amount ie. Rs.30,000/- before the trial court. The revision petitioner can be granted three months time to pay/deposit the balance amount of Rs.35,000/- if Rs.30,000/- is already deposited by the revision petitioner as submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. 5. In the result, a) This revision petition is allowed in part. b) The impugned concurrent verdict of guilty and conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are confirmed. (c) But the sentence imposed is modified and reduced. In supersession of the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the courts below, she is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of court. She is further directed under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to pay/deposit the balance amount of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Crl.R.P.No.1382/09 4 thirty five thousand only) as compensation within a period of three months and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The amount in deposit, if any, and the balance amount if deposited shall be released to the complainant on proper application. The revision petitioner shall have time till 05/07/2011 to pay/deposit the balance amount of compensation of Rs.35,000/-, if Rs.30,000/- is already deposited and thus avoid the default sentence. The revision petitioner shall appear and her sureties shall produce her before the learned Magistrate on 06/07/2011 for execution of the sentence. (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge Crl.R.P.No.1382/09 5 Crl.R.P.No.1382/09 6 Crl.R.P.No.1382/09 7 M.C.HARI RANI, J Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2001 ORDER Crl.R.P.No.1382/09 8 17th DAY OF JUNE 2001 Crl.R.P.No.1382/09 9