IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2009 / 12TH SRAVANA 1931 CRL.REV.PET.NO. 4541 OF 2006() ------------------------------------------- CRA.957/2005 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, (ADHOC-I) ERNAKULAM CC.72/2002 OF ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM . ................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED --------------------------------------------------------------- MINAR P.V., AGED 35, S/O. VASU, PARANELLIL HOUSE, THIRUVAMKULAM P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.UDAYABHANU RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------- 1. K.M.BIJU, S/O. MADHAVAN, KIZHAKKEDATH MYALIL, KAMBIVELIKKAKOM, THIRUVAMKULAM P.O., ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.P.M.SAJI FOR R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI C.S. HRITHWIK THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL. R.P. NO.4541 of 2006 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2009 O R D E R -------------- This revision is in challenge of judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-II), Ernakulam in Crl. Appeal No.957 of 2005 confirming conviction and sentence of petitioner for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, “the Act”). 2. Petitioner and respondent No.1 filed Crl.M.A No.7505 of 2009 reporting settlement and seeking permission to compound the offence. 3. It is seen from application No.7505 of 2009 that parties have settled the dispute out of court. There is no reason to think that the composition is not voluntary. Offence under Section 138 of the Act is made compoundable under Section 147 of the Act. Hence permission is granted and Crl.M.A. No.7505 of 2009 is allowed. The composition entered between petitioner and respondent No.1 is accepted and that shall have the effect of acquittal of the petitioner under Section 320(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. As per the settlement reached between petitioner and CRL. R.P. No.4541 of 2006 -: 2 :- respondent No.1, the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) deposited by the petitioner in the trial court is payable to respondent No.1. Counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has no objection in the said amount being withdrawn by respondent No.1. Accordingly it is directed that amount if any deposited by petitioner in the trial court shall be paid to respondent No.1 on application. Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of as above. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv