IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2011 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 902 of 2005 ----------------------------- CRA.193/2004 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM CC.508/2002 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ERATTUPETTA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED. --------------------------------------- P.S.SALIM, PUTHUPPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKAYAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE OF KERALA. --------------------------------------------------------- 1. ROBERT GEORGE, S/O. GEORGE, PULIKKATTU HOUSE, CHOLATHADAM P.O. 2. STATE OF KERALA-REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.BABY THOMAS FOR R1 SRI.GIGIMON ISSAC FOR R1 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.C. HARI RANI, J. ====================== CRL.R.P. NO. 902 OF 2005 ======================= Dated this the 11th day of March 2011 ORDER This revision petition is filed by the accused against the concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court, after considering the evidence on record, convicted the accused and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. It was also directed to pay Rs.55,000/- to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(3)Cr.P.C. and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 45 days. The appellate court has modified the sentence and the appeal was allowed in part. The conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was confirmed and the accused was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Accused was also directed to pay a CRRP 902/2004 -2- compensation of Rs.55,000/- to the complainant under Section 357(3)Cr.P.C. and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. That finding is challenged by the revision petitioner/accused in this revision petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the first respondent/complainant. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused that the revision petitioner is not challenging the conviction against him found by the courts below. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner prays that the sentence may be modified for imprisonment till rising of the court. He also seeks six months time to pay the compensation of Rs.55,000/- as ordered by the appellate court. 4. In the result, a)this revision petition is allowed in part. b)The concurrent finding of guilty and conviction for the offence under Section138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the revision petitioner is confirmed and the sentence is CRRP 902/2004 -3- modified for imprisonment till rising of the court. c)The revision petitioner shall pay Rs.55,000/-as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. to the first respondent/complainant within six months and in default of which he is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. d)The revision petitioner is given time till 12/9/2011 either to pay the amount directly to the first respondent or to deposit the amount before the trial court and thus avoid the default sentence. e)The first respondent is permitted to withdraw Rs.55,000/- if the same is deposited by the revision petitioner before the trial court on filing proper application. f)The revision petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on 13/9/2011 for execution of the sentence. Sd/- M.C. HARI RANI ks. JUDGE TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE