IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 29TH APRIL 2008 / 9TH VAISAKHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1439 of 2008() ------------------------------ CRA.3/2002 of I ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM CC.694/1998 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOLLAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ K.E.JOY, S/O.EASSY, VATTEZHATHU VEEDU, CHANDIROOR MURI, AROOR VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: --------------------------------------------- 1. ALEXANDER SEBASTIAN, THARAYIL BHAVAN, SAKTHIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLICL PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P. No.1439 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of April, 2008 ORDER This revision petition is directed against a concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I Act. The petitioner faces a sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month. 2. The cheque is for an amount of Rs.1 lakh. Called upon to explain the nature of the challenge which the petitioner wants to mount against the impugned concurrent judgments, the learned counsel for the petitioner only submits that the petitioner does not want to challenge the verdict of guilty and conviction on merits. He only prays that the sentence of imprisonment may be modified and the sentence of Crl.R.P. No.1439 of 2008 -: 2 :- fine set aside. The petitioner is willing to compensate the de facto complainant by making payment of the actual cheque amount of Rs.1 lakh, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. I am satisfied that the verdict of guilty and conviction do not warrant interference. I am further satisfied that the sentence imposed can be modified and reduced. It is submitted that the petitioner is already in custody from 14/2/08. I am satisfied, in these circumstances, that the sentence imposed on the petitioner can be modified and reduced to make sure that he does not have to undergo the substantive sentence of incarceration any longer. 4. In the nature of the relief which I propose to grant, I am satisfied that it is not necessary to wait for issue and return of notice to the respondent. 5. In the result: (a) This Crl.R.P is allowed. (b) The impugned verdict of guilty and conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I Act are upheld; (c) But the sentence imposed is modified and reduced to imprisonment for the period already undergone. The petitioner is further directed to pay the actual cheque amount of Rs.1 lakh Crl.R.P. No.1439 of 2008 -: 3 :- as compensation and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. If realised, the entire compensation amount shall be released to the complainant. It is further directed that if the petitioner forthwith pays an amount of Rs.25,000/- and executes a bond for Rs.75,000/- with two solvent sureties, the petitioner shall be released from custody and shall be granted time till 31/5/08 to pay the balance amount of compensation. The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate on or before 31/5/08 to undergo the default sentence if payment is not made by then. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge