IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2011 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1470 of 2011() ------------------------------ (CRA.177/2009 of ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (FAST TRACK-1), TRIVANDRUM . ST.159/2007 of JUDL.FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-V, NEYYATTINKARA) .................... REVN. PETITIONER: -------------------------- A.DAVID RAJ ,LMS HOSTEL (GENTS) LMS COMPOUND, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RESIDING AT PARUTHIVILA VEEDU, CHERUVARAKONAM PARASSALA PO, NEYYATTINKARA 695 502. BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ALFRED JOSEPH, JOSEPH COLLEGE LMS COMPOUND, PARASSALA 695 502. R1 BY P.P. SMT. REKHA C. NAYAR. ADV. SRI.V.V.MITHUN FOR R-2 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl. R.P. No.1470 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated 20th day of June , 2011 ORDER The revision petitioner is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under section 138 of the N.I.Act and the trial court as well as the lower appellate court found that the accused is guilty and accordingly he is convicted and sentenced for the said offence. 2. The revision petitioner has filed a memo on 10.6.2011 stating that during the pendency of the case, the entire matter was settled and the 2nd respondent/complainant has received the entire amount covered by the cheque in dispute and he does not intend to prosecute the revision petitioner/accused any further in the matter. 3. On 10.6.2011 this court passed an order with an observation that, as the dispute has been settled out of court, this Crl.R.P can be disposed of recording the settlement and the compounding of the offence on the basis of the memo filed on 10.6.2011. The revision CRRP 1470/11 -:2:- petitioner has also complied with the condition of paying cost, as fixed by this Court in the above order on the basis of the guideline issued by the Apex Court in the decision reported in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457]. In the light of the composition of the offence between the contesting parties, as evident by the memo filed on 10.6.2011 and the order dated 10.6.2011 of this court, I am of the view that this Crl. R.P can be allowed, acquitting the accused in terms of Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C. In the result, this Crl.Revision petition is allowed setting aside the judgment dated 9.2.2009 in S.T.159/2007 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Neyyattinkara and the judgment dated 31.1.2011 in Crl.A.No.177 of 2009 of the court of Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Thiruvananthapurm, and acquitting the revision petitioner of all the charges levelled against him in the above case and he is set at liberty. The Crl.R.P is allowed accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, kvm/- JUDGE CRRP 1470/11 -:3:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 1470 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of June, 2011. ORDER Counsel for the petitioner as well as the 2nd respondent submitted that the matter has already been settled out of court and the 2nd respondent has no further grievance against the revision petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner has also filed a memo of settlement dated 10.6.2011. CRRP 1470/11 -:4:- As the dispute has been settled out of court I am of the view that this Crl.R.P. can be disposed of recording the settlement and the compounding of the offence. But in view of the decision reported in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457], the petitioner is bound to deposit certain amount in the KELSA towards cost for filing compounding petition. Following the guideline issued by the Apex court in the above decision and in exercise of the discretion granted to this Court through the above decision, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten thousand only) in the KELSA, within one week from today and he is further directed to produce the receipt showing the remittance in the registry within ten days of remittance and on receiving the receipt, the registry is directed to send the said memo to the Bench along with this Crl.R.P for consideration. There will be a direction that the warrant if any pending against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance, for a period of ten days. Hand over the order today itself. CRRP 1470/11 -:5:- V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/-