IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2010 / 24TH POUSHA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3747 of 2006() ------------------------------ CRA.333/2000 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-III, THALASSERY CC.445/1997 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KANNUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER/ APPELLANT/ACCUSED:- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. K.KUNHABDULLA, S/O. MAMMU, NEAR SAHAKARANA MAVELI STORE, KOTTACHERY, KANHANGAD. ADDL. RESPONDENTS 2 TO 5 IMPLEADED:- 2. K.V. MRINALINI, AGED 49 YEARS, W/O. LATE V.K. LAKSHMANAN, VADAKKAN KOVIL HOUSE, VANKULAVAYAL P.O., AZHEEKODU, KANNUR. 3. DANYA V.K., D/O. LATE V.K. LAKSHMANAN, -DO- 4. DIVYA V.K., D/O. LATE V.K. LAKSHMANAN -DO- REPRESENTED BY FIRST PETITIONER, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER. 5. NITHIN VK, S/O, LATE V.K.LAKSHKMANAN DO REP. BY FIRST PETITIONER, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER. BY ADV. SRI. S.U.NAZAR SRI. MANSOOR.B.H. 2 RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. V.K.LAKSHMANAN, S/O. BALAN, DHANYA WATCH WORKS, BELLARD ROAD, KANNUR-1. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SMT.C.SEENA FOR ADDL.3-6 SRI. C.S. HRITHWIK, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P. No.3747 of 2006 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 14.01.2010 ORDER The accused in C.C.No.445 of 1997 on the file of the J.F.C.M-I, Kannur for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him concurrently by the courts below. 2. Pending this revision, the parties have settled the matter. Crl.M.A.No.316 of 2010 has been filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 seeking permission to record the composition entered into between the revision petitioner and the complainant. The said petition has been signed by both the revision petitioner as well as the complainant and their respective counsel. In the light of this development, the aforementioned composition is recorded and it will have the effect of an acquittal of the revision petitioner within the meaning of Sec. 320 (8) Cr.P.C. This Crl. R.P. is disposed of as above. Dated this the 14th day of January, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. sj