IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 5TH DECEMBER 2008 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3692 OF 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.270/2006 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-I), THODUPUZHA ST.970/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ADIMALI .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------- REJI @ K.RAJENDRAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. DAMODARAN, PRABHALAYAM, ERANJIPPALAM P.O., MOINKUTTY ROAD, EAST HILL VILLAGE, CALICUT-6, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ----------------------- 1. AJITHA JOSHI (AJITHA E.V.), AGED 37 YRS, W/O. P.M.JOSHI, RESIDING AT BSNL QUARTERS OF SDI TELECOM TELEPHONE COMPOUND, ADIMALI KARA, MANNAMKANDOM VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. NAZAR FOR R2 SRI.P.K.SAJEEVAN FOR R1 SRI.T.K.AJITHKUMAR (VALATH) FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P. NO. 3692 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of December, 2008 O R D E R Revision petitioner is the accused and first respondent the complainant in S.T. 970 of 2005 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adimaly. Petitioner was convicted and sentenced for offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Petitioner challenged the conviction before Additional Sessions Court, Thodupuzha in Crl. Appeal 270 of 2006. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on reappreciation of evidence confirmed the conviction but modified the substantive sentence to imprisonment till rising of Court, maintaining the compensation under section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. Revision is filed challenging the conviction and sentence. 2. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioner was heard. 3. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioner submitted that revision petitioner is not challenging the conviction or the sentence, in view of the concurrent findings and the evidence on record and petitioner may be granted four CRRP3692/08 2 months time to pay the amount as directed by the learned Sessions Judge. 4. On hearing the learned counsel appearing for revision petitioner and going through the judgments of Courts below, I find no reason to interfere with the conviction or the sentence. Evidence establish that revision petitioner issued Ext.P1 cheque drawn in his account towards repayment of Rs.1,50,000/- borrowed earlier. It is also proved that the cheque 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. Conviction of the petitioner for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is perfectly legal. 5. Then the only question is regarding the sentence. Learned Sessions Judge modified the sentence to imprisonment till rising of Court in addition to maintaining the compensation awarded by learned Sessions Judge, under section 357(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure which was also only for the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. In such circumstanced no interference is warranted in the sentence also. CRRP3692/08 3 Revision is dismissed. Revision petitioner is granted four months time from today to pay the amount. Revision petitioner is directed to appear before the Magistrate on 7.4.2009. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Okb/-