IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 20TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2588 of 2004() ------------------------------------ CRA.289/2003 of SESSIONS COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA CC.290/2002 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------------- ABRAHAM C.KURUVILA, S/O.LATE C.KURUVILA, CHENATTU HOUSE, KUMBANAD POST. BY ADV. SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RSPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JACOB JOHN, CHEMPAKAMANGALAM, KUMBANAD POST. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.PAUL MATHEW (PERUMPILLIL) SRI.ANIL GEORGE R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.BINDU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs P. Q. BARKATH ALI, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Crl.R.P. No. 2588 of 2004 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 9th day of February, 2011 O R D E R Revision petitioner is accused in C.C.No. 290 of 2002 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pathanamthitta and appellant in Crl.Appeal No. 289 of 2003 on the file of the Court of Sessions, Pathanamthitta. He was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and directed that if the fine amount was realized, Rs.5,000/- should be paid to the complainant as compensation. On appeal, the lower appellate court confirmed his conviction and modified the sentence to imprisonment till rising of court and to pay a fine of Rs.2,10,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Out of the fine amount Rs.2,00,000/- was ordered to be paid to the complainant as compensation. Now the accused has Crl.R.P. No.2588/2004 2 come up in revision challenging his conviction and sentence. 2. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused and the 1st respondent/complainant present. They have submitted that the matter has been settled in 2005 in the connected civil suit filed in respect of the same transaction. A memo is filed to that effect by both the parties. 3. As the matter has been settled, the revision petition is allowed. The conviction of the revision petitioner which was confirmed in appeal and the sentence imposed by the trial court which was modified in appeal by the lower appellate court are set aside. The revision petitioner/accused is acquitted under section 320 Cr.P.C. His bail bonds are cancelled. Rs.30,000/- deposited by the revision petitioner/accused before the trial court shall be released to the 1st respondent/complainant as agreed by the parties. P. Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn.