IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2009 / 26TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 181 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRA.129/2007 of I ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA ST.136/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, KATTAPPANA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- PRINCE, S/O.JOSEPH, VECHOOR HOUSE, CHOTTUPURA P.O., KUMALY. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.TOMY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STAE --------------------------------------------- 1. KURIAKOSE @ KUNJUMON, S/O.CHERIYAN, SRAMBICKAL HOUSE, MARYKULAM KARA, AYYAPPANCOIL VILLAGE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MUHAMMED PUZHAKKARA THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P.NO.181 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 16th January 2009 O R D E R Revision petitioner is the accused and first respondent, the complainant in S.T.136/2005 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kattappana. Revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year and compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- an in default simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Revision petitioner challenged the conviction and sentence before the Sessions court, Thodupuzha in Crl.A.129/2007. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on re-appreciation of evidence confirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to imprisonment till rising of court and compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-, the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. Revision is filed challenging the conviction and sentence. 2. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioner was heard. CRRP 181/09 2 3. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioner submitted that in view of the evidence on record and the concurrent findings of fact, revision petitioner is not challenging the conviction but he may be granted six months time to pay compensation as directed by learned Sessions Judge. 4. On going through the judgments of the courts below, I find no reason to interfere with the conviction or the sentence. Evidence establish that revision petitioner issued Ext.P1 cheque for Rs.5,00,000/- borrowed by him on 30/10/2004 and the cheque was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds when presented for encashment. It is also proved that first respondent had complied with all statutory formalities provided under Sections 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. In such circumstances conviction of revision petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is perfectly legal. 5. Learned Additional Sessions Judge modified the sentence to imprisonment till rising of court and compensation, which was only for the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. In such circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with sentence also. Revision is CRRP 181/09 3 dismissed. Revision petitioner is granted six months time to pay the compensation. Revision petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kattappana on 15/7/2009. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.