IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2011 / 27TH ASWINA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2435 of 2011() ------------------------------ CRA.88/2007 of SESSIONS COURT, KALPETTA ST.300/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, SULTHANBATHERY .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ---------------------------------------------------------- N. SALEEM, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.KUNJIMOHAMMED, RESIDING AT NUMDATHIL HOUSE, KAIVATTA, BITHERKAD P.O., NILGIRIS DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.V.JAMES SRI.P.DALBI EMMANUEL SRI.M.J.ABRAHAM SMT.C.C.JANCY SMT.SANGIMOL A.MENACHERY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. M/S.SREE GOKULAM CHITS & FINANCE COMPANY (PVT)LTD.,KIZHAKKEGAGATH COMPLEX,SULTHAN BATHERY, REP.BY ITS AUTHORISED REP.SRI.V.T.MANOJAN,AGED 40, S/O.T.P.APPUTTY,THEJUS,PNTHEERANKAVE POST, KODAL AMSOM, KAILAMADOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RAJESH THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: pm S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 2435 of 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of October, 2011 ORDER The revision is by the accused who has been convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, (for short the N.I.Act), concurrently by the two Courts below. Sentence imposed against the accused as modified by the learned Sessions Judge in appeal is simple imprisonment for two months and to pay fine of Rs.13,321/-, the cheque amount, with default term of simple imprisonment for one month more. Fine amount, if realised, was directed to be paid to the complainant. 2. When the revision came for consideration, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused submitted that he has no arguments on merit to assail conviction but only against the sentence imposing substantive term of imprisonment of two moths, with a request for grant of two weeks time to pay fine imposed and thus avoid the default term of imprisonment thereof. The cheque amount involved in the case is only Rs.13,321/- and the complainant is shown to be a financial concern operating chitty business. No exceptional circumstance Crl.R.P.No. 2435 of 2011 2 has been made out in the case to justify the imposition of a substantive term of imprisonment for the period fixed as part of the punishment against the offender/accused for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. So far as sentencing the offender under Section 138 of the N.I.Act the outlook of the court should be move for compensating the complainant than to be punitive. Of course, where exceptional circumstances justify severe and harsh punishment against the offender for his incarceration in prison for a term such sentence can be imposed. As already indicated in the present case no such circumstance is made out. So much so, I find substantive term of imprisonment imposed against the petitioner/accused can be reduced to imprisonment till rising of the court retaining the fine awarded with the default term of imprisonment. Time requested for payment is reasonable and it can be granted. 3. Affirming the conviction sentence imposed against the revision petitioner/accused is modified and reduced to imprisonment till rising of the Court, retaining the fine with default term of imprisonment fixed. Petitioner is directed to appear before the Magistrate on 21.11.2011 to serve out the Crl.R.P.No. 2435 of 2011 3 imprisonment till the rising of the court and to report the payment of fine. The Magistrate is directed to keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence against the accused till the date fixed as above for his appearance, to enable him to pay the fine amount within such period. In default of his appearance and non payment of the fine the Magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. Revision disposed of. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. Rkc //True Copy// PA to Judge