IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1615 of 2010() ------------------------------ CRA.139/2008 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT FAST TRACK-II(ADHOC, THRISSUR CC.51/2007, 52/2007 & 53/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, KODUNGALLUR .................... PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED :- ----------------------------------------------------- K.R.SATHEESH, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. RAMAN, KOTTAKATH HOUSE, CHENDRAPPINNI DESOM, CHENDRAPPINNI VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI.JAGAN ABRAHAM M.GEORGE SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD SRI.P.G.PRAMOD SRI.KANDAMPULLY RAHUL RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT :- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. N.K.VINODAN, S/O. KUNJIVELAYI, NANDILATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHENDRAPPINNI DESOM, CHENDRAPPINNI VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTEDBY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.M.R.VENUGOPAL THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: jvt V.K.MOHANAN, J. ----------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.1615 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of June 2010 O R D E R The accused in three cases namely; C.C.No.51/2007, 52/2007 and 53/2007 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur is the revision petitioner, who challenges his conviction and sentence for the offence under Sec. 138 of the N.I.Act connected with the dishonour of three cheques for a total amount of Rs.2,50,000/-. 2. The trial court as well as the lower appellate court after considering the entire evidence and materials on record, held that the complainant has established his case and found guilty of the accused and accordingly the accused/revision petitioner is convicted under Sec.138 of the N.I.Act. While the trial court imposed sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a compensation of Rs.3,25,000/- under Sec.357(3) of Cr.P.C. Crl.R.P.No.1615 of 2010 : 2 : and fixed default sentence for three months simple imprisonment, the lower appellate court while confirming the conviction, modified the sentence and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment till the rising of the court and also to pay a compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- and accordingly the revision petitioner was directed to appear before the trial court on or before 5.10.2009. It is the above conviction and sentence are challenged in this revision petition. 3. The trial court as well as the lower appellate court after considering the evidence and materials on record has concurrently found that the accused/revision petitioner has convicted the offence punishable under Sec.138 of the N.I.Act. Therefore, I find no reason to interfere with such concurrent findings of the courts below. 4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that some breathing time may be granted to the revision petitioner to deposit the compensation amount and to receive the sentence. 5. I am of the view that the said request of the Crl.R.P.No.1615 of 2010 : 3 : counsel can be considered in the light of the decision in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H (J.T. 2010(4) SC 457) wherein it was held that in the case of dishonour of cheques, the compensatory aspect of the remedy should be given priority than the punitive aspect. Accordingly, while the conviction of the revision petitioner under Sec.138 of the N.I.Act recorded by the trial court as well as the lower appellate court is confirmed, the sentence of imprisonment awarded against the revision petitioner and modified by the lower appellate court is also confirmed. The compensation amount ordered by the lower appellate court is enhanced to the tune of Rs.2,75,000/- and the revision petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,75,000/- as compensation to the complainant under Sec.357(3) of Cr.P.C. In default, he is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Accordingly the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 15th September, 2010 to receive the sentence of imprisonment and to deposit the compensation amount of Rs.2,75,000/-. Crl.R.P.No.1615 of 2010 : 4 : In case of any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in appearing before the trial court as directed above and making the deposit of compensation amount, the trial court is free to take coercive steps to secure the presence of the revision petitioner and to execute the sentence and to realize the amount of compensation. This revision petition is disposed of as above. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE. Jvt