IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2009 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3956 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRA.1068/2006 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), TRIVANDRUM ST.408/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, VARKALA .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- H.NAZEER, S/O.HAZANKUTTY RAWTHER, BANGLOWIL HOUSE, KARIYARA MURI, VILAKUDY VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.D.SAJEEV SMT.LIGEY ANTONY RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------------------- 1. PURUSHOTHAMAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN, CHARUVILA VEEDU, MANAMBOOR, MANAMBOOR VILLAGE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: SRI JAYAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. ------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.3956 of 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2009 ORDER The Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Varkala in S.T.No.408 of 2006 on his file convicted the revision petitioner for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year and to pay Rupees two lakhs as compensation to the first respondent. In Criminal Appeal No.1068 of 2006, the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-I), Thiruvananthapuram by judgment dated 15/10/2009 confirmed the conviction and sentence. Assailing the legality, correctness and propriety of the above conviction and sentence as confirmed in appeal, this revision petition was filed. 2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that he is not assailing the conviction, but the sentence is assailed. According to the learned counsel, the revision petitioner is a Gulf returned person and because of the financial difficulties, he had to face the prosecution and that he is now without any avocation and in the above circumstance, he may be dealt leniently in awarding sentence. Crl.R.P.No.3956 of 2009 2 3. Having heard the learned counsel and perusing the judgments of the courts below, I find that the submission merits consideration and that a sentence of imprisonment till rising of the court with order to pay compensation would meet the ends of justice. In the result, this revision petition is allowed in part. While confirming the conviction, the sentence is reduced to imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay Rupees two lakhs as compensation to the first respondent. In default of payment of compensation, the revision petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The revision petitioner is granted six months time to remit the compensation. Till then, the bail bond executed by him shall remain in force. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE skj