IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 2ND AUGUST 2010 / 11TH SRAVANA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 58 of 2004(B) ----------------------------- CRA.114/2002 of III ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-I) THRISSUR CC.315/1999 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHAVAKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED: --------------------------------------- BALACHANDRAN, S/O. K.S. NAIR, PATTAATHAKKIL HOUSE, GURUVAYUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.N.PADMAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ----------------------------------------------- 1. K.T. RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O. AMBADY SAVITHRI BRAHMANI AMMA, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, DESOM, MANAGING DIRECTOR, ATHIRA FINANCE (P) LTD., GURUVAYUR, CHAVAKKAD. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. ADV. SRI.G.UNNIIKRISHNON FOR R1 SRI.P.A.SALIM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.R.P.NO.58 OF 2004 --------------------------------------------- Dated 2nd August, 2010 O R D E R Revision petitioner, the accused in C.C.315/1999 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chavakkad was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act on a complaint filed by the first respondent. Petitioner challenged the conviction and sentence before Sessions court, Thrissur in Crl.A.114/2002. First respondent filed Crl.R.P.38/2002 to enhance the sentence. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on re- appreciation of evidence confirmed the conviction but modified the compensation to Rs.1,50,000/- instead of Rs.1,33,165/- originally awarded, maintaining the CRRP 58/04 2 substantive sentence and imprisonment till rising of court. Revision is filed challenging the same. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the first respondent were heard. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that revision petitioner has already paid the amount due to the first respondent. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that first respondent has received the entire compensation due to him as per the modified sentence passed by Additional Sessions Judge. In such circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with the conviction or the sentence. Judicial First Class Magistrate is directed to execute the sentence. It is made clear that as it is CRRP 58/04 3 submitted by the first respondent that compensation has been paid by the petitioner and received by the complainant, only the substantive sentence need be executed. Petitioner is directed to appear before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chavakkad on 11/8/2010. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.