IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2011 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 884 of 2011() ----------------------------- C.C.NO.60/2009 OF THE JFCM -II, ADOOR. CRA.126/2009 of ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC) I, PATHANAMTHITTA ............................. REVN. PETITIONERS: REVN.PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ D.BABY, PARAPPATTOOR VEEDU, THEPPUPARA P.O., VELLAPPARAMURUPPU, THODUVACKADU, EZHAMKULAM, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------------------- 1. K.N.SOMAN, KALEELUVILAYIL, ARUKALICKAL EAST, NEDUMAN, EZHAMKULAM, ADOOR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN FOR R1 R2 BY P.P. SRI SABU SREEDHARAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl. R.P. No.884 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated 25th Day of March , 2011 ORDER The revision petitioner is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under section 138 of the N.I.Act and the trial court as well as the lower appellate court found that the accused is guilty and accordingly he is convicted and sentenced for the said offence. 2. Today by a separate order, in Crl.M.A.No. 2875/2011, this court allowed the parties to compound the offence and accordingly, the composition of the said offence is recorded. The revision petitioner has also complied with the condition of paying cost, as fixed by this Court, on the basis of the guideline issued by the Apex Court in the decision reported in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457]. In the light of the composition of the offence between the contesting parties, CRRP 884/11 2 I am of the view that this Crl. R.P can be allowed, acquitting the accused in terms of Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C. 3. In the result, this Crl.Revision petition is allowed setting aside the judgment dated in C.C.No.60 of 2009 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Adoor, and the judgment dated 30.7.2010 in Crl.A.No.126/2009 of the court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, (Ad hoc) -I, Pathanamthitta and acquitting the revision petitioner of all the charges levelled against him in the above case and he is set at liberty. 4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner was arrested on 7.2.2011 and now he is in the Central Prison, Thiruvananthapuram and he may be ordered to be released in the light of the acquittal recorded by this Court. In the light of the order passed by this Court acquitting the revision petitioner/accused, he is entitled to get CRRP 884/11 3 released from jail forthwith in case he is not required in any other case. Therefore, the Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Superintendent, Central Prison, Thiruvananthapruam for further action. The Crl.R.P is allowed accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- CRRP 884/11 4 V.K.MOHANAN, J. O.P.No. JUDGMENT Dated:..