IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1592 of 2010() ------------------------------ CRA.1065/2008 of ADDL.DISTRICT&SESSIONS , FAST TRACK (ADHOC-II), KOZHIKODE CC.434/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PAYYOLI .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED :- ------------------------------------------------------------------- GEETHA,W/O.KUMARAN,KARUCHERI HOUSE, EDACHERI,VADAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT AND STATE :- ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. C.HARIDASAN,S/O.CHOYI,CHERIYAVIL HOUSE, IRINGAL AMSOM,PAYYOLI,KOYILANDY TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA REP:BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.PUSHPALATHA.M.K. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: jvt V.K.MOHANAN, J. ----------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.1592 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June 2010 O R D E R The accused in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Sec.138 of the N.I.Act is the revision petitioner. 2. The allegation against the revision petitioner/accused is that on 1.5.2007, she had borrowed a sum of Rs.80,000/- from the complainant on condition that the same would be returned within two months and thereafter towards the discharge of said liability the accused issued a cheque dated 20.7.2007 for the said amount, which dishonoured when presented for encashment. 3. The trial court as well as the lower appellate court after considering the evidence and materials on Crl.R.P.No.1592 of 2010 : 2 : record found that the cheque in question was issued by the accused towards the discharge of legally enforcible debt that due to the complainant. On the basis of the above finding the trial court sentenced the revision petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and also directed to pay compensation of Rs.80,000/- to the complainant under Sec.357(3) of Cr.P.C. and the default sentence is fixed as simple imprisonment for three months. In appeal, at the instance of the accused, by judgment dated 9.2.2010 in Crl.A.No.1065/2008, the court of Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track (Adhoc-II), Kozhikode, confirmed the conviction and sentence and dismissed the appeal. 4. The trial court as well as the lower appellate court has concurrently found that the revision petitioner/accused is guilty under Sec.138 of the N.I.Act, I find no reason to interfere with such concurrent finding. 5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner Crl.R.P.No.1592 of 2010 : 3 : submitted that a breathing time may be granted to the revision petitioner to make the payment and also requested to take a lenient view in the matter of sentence. 6. In the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H [J.T. 2010(4) SC 457], I am of the view that the amount of compensation, now fixed under Sec.357(3), can be converted into fine under Sec.357(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. with slight modification. Being a lady, the imprisonment can be reduced till the rising of the court especially when the compensation amount being enhanced. In the result, this revision petition is disposed of confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner/accused under Sec.138 of the N.I.Act. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment awarded by the court below is reduced till rising of the court and the petitioner is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.90,000/- and in default, she is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and on realisation of Crl.R.P.No.1592 of 2010 : 4 : the fine amount, the said amount shall be paid to the complainant under Sec.357(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the revision petitioner/accused is directed to appear before the trial court on 15th September, 2010 to receive the sentence of imprisonment and to deposit the fine amount of Rs.90,000/-. In case of any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in appearing before the trial court as directed above and 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 sentence. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE. Jvt