IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1901 of 2005 ------------------------------ CRA.271/2003 of SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA ST.137/1997 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ALAPPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: --------------------- P.G.PUSHKARAN, THATTUNGAL, ZILLA COURT WARD, THATHAMPALLI P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.A.KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. CHINNAMMA JOHN, KALARIKKAL VELI HOUSE, AVALOOKKUMMU, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. ADV. SRI.M.SUNILKUMAR FOR R1 SRI.SACHIN JOSEPH FOR R1 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. ANEY PAUL THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.C.HARI RANI, J ================= Crl.R.P.No.1901 of 2005 =================== Dated this the 31st day of March 2011 O R D E R The revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court as per judgment dated 14/7/2003 in S.T.No.137/1997 convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The conviction and sentence were confirmed by the appellate court and the the appeal was dismissed vide judgment dated 26/5/2005 in Crl.Appeal No.271/2003. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor . 3. At the time of argument, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused that the revision petitioner is not challenging the concurrent finding of conviction CRL.R.P.NO. 1901/2005 -2- entered against him by the courts below for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned counsel also submitted that Rs.25,000/-, that is half of the cheque amount has been deposited already by the revision petitioner before the trial court as ordered by this Court on 5/8/2005 while suspending the sentence as per order in Crl.M.A.No.12990/2005. The revision petitioner is ready to deposit the balance amount. The learned counsel prays that six months time may be granted to the revision petitioner to pay the amount of compensation. It is also prayed to modify the sentence of imprisonment for three months to imprisonment till rising of court. 4. The disputed cheque in this case is for Rs.50,000/- dated 5/9/1996. A concurrent finding of guilty and conviction is there against the revision petitioner by the trial court as well as by the first appellate court. About 14 years is already elapsed after the issuance of the disputed cheque. In the absence of challenge on any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail. Therefore the verdict of guilty and conviction do not warrant any interference and the same is confirmed. Only the cheque amount of Rs.50,000/- has CRL.R.P.NO. 1901/2005 -3- been ordered as compensation by the courts below. Considering the elapse of 14 years after the issuance of cheque, I find that the compensation amount ordered by the courts below at Rs.50,000/- should be enhanced to Rs.55,000/-. The revision petitioner can be granted four months time to pay/deposit the total amount of Rs.55,000/- less the amount, if any, already deposited by the revision petitioner as submitted by the learned counsel and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of three months is modified and reduced to imprisonment till rising of court. 5. In the result, a) This revision petition is allowed in part. b) The impugned concurrent verdict of guilty and conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are confirmed. (c) But the sentence imposed is modified and reduced. In supersession of the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner by the courts below, he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of court. He is further directed under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to pay/deposit the total amount of Rs.55,000/- (Rupees CRL.R.P.NO. 1901/2005 -4- fifty five thousand only) less the amount if any already deposited as compensation and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. The amount in deposit, if any, and the balance amount if deposited shall be released to the complainant on proper application. The petitioner shall have time till 1/8/2011 to pay/deposit the total amount of compensation of Rs.55,000/- less the amount if any already deposited and thus avoid the default sentence. The petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on 2/8/2011 for execution of the sentence. Sd/- M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE ks TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE CRL.R.P.NO. 1901/2005 -5- CRL.R.P.NO. 1901/2005 -6- CRL.R.P.NO. 1901/2005 -7- M.C.HARI RANI, J Crl.R.P.No.504 of 2001 ORDER CRL.R.P.NO. 1901/2005 -8- 17th DAY OF JUNE 2001 CRL.R.P.NO. 1901/2005 -9-