IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2010 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3073 of 2010 (D) ------------------------------ CRA.159/2006 of ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-III), KASARAGODE STC.2024/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, HOSDRUG .................... REVN. PETITIONER/PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.ABDUL KHADER, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.POKAR ALI HAJI, SHAMINAS, BANGALAM, MADIKAI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. N.P.NOUFAL, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.T.A.RAHIM, WEAVERS STREET, NILESHWAR, P.O.NILESHWAR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE SIMON R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.V.TEK CHAND THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK V.K.MOHANAN, J. ------------------------------- Crl. R.P.No.3073 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2010. O R D E R The accused in a prosecution for an offence u/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is the revision petitioner, as he is aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence imposed by the courts below. 2. The counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner has no contention on merit but his grievance is against the unreasonable and exorbitant sentence imposed against him and it is also the submission of the learned counsel that the revision petitioner is ready to pay the compensation amount. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, I am of the view that, the said submission requires a serious consideration. 3. The apex court in a recent decision reported in Damodar S.Prabhu V. Sayed Babalal H. (JT 2010(4) SC 457) has held that, in the case of dishonour of cheques, the compensatory 2 Crl. R.P.No.3073 of 2010 aspect of the remedy should be given priority over the punitive aspects. Therefore according to me, the sentence imposed against the revision petitioner requires reconsideration and the revision petitioner can be granted one month time to pay the compensation amount, in the light of the above facts and settled legal position, but subject to slight enhancement in the compensation amount. In the result, this revision petition is disposed of confirming the conviction against the revision petitioner u/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act as recorded by the courts below. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment awarded by the courts below is modified and reduced to one day simple imprisonment ie., till the rising of the court. Whereas, the compensation amount ordered by the courts below u/s.357(3) of Cr.P.C. is enhanced to the tune of Rs.65,000/-, which shall be paid by the revision petitioner, within 1 month from today and in case of default in paying the compensation amount within the stipulated time, the revision petitioner is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 months. Accordingly, the revision 3 Crl. R.P.No.3073 of 2010 petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 29.11.2010, to receive the sentence of imprisonment and to pay the compensation amount as directed by this court. It is made clear that the revision petitioner is free to pay the compensation amount either directly to the complainant or by remitting the same in the court below, which ever subject to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate of the trial court. In case, any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in appearing before the court below as directed above and in making the payment of compensation amount, the trial court is free to take coercive steps to secure the presence of the revision petitioner and to execute the sentence awarded against the revision petitioner. The execution of warrant if any, pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till 29.11.2010. Criminal revision petition is disposed of accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. ami/