IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 98 of 2009() --------------------------------------- CRA.299/2007 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)III, MANJERI ST.2180/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, NILAMBUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT ------------------------------ K.J. XAVIER, S/O. JOSEPH, KODAVANAL HOUSE, MUNDERI, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT/ ACCUSED & STATE ------------------------ 1. JAYAPRASAD, S/O. THANKAPPAN, NEDIYAKALAYIL HOUSE, UPPADA, NETTIKULAM, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DIST. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI -31. R1 BY ADV. MR.K.RAKESH THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.S.Gopinathan, J. ========================================== Crl.R.P.98 of 2009 ========================================== Dated this the 28th day of October, 2009. ORDER 1.The revision petitioner, who is the accused in S.T.No.2180 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Nilambur was prosecuted by the first respondent alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court found him guilty. Accordingly, he was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month with a direction to pay Rs.75,000/- as compensation to the first respondent with default clause to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. In appeal, the Sessions Court sustained the conviction and the substantive sentence. The direction to pay compensation was set aside. Now this revision, assailing the legality and correctness of the above conviction and sentence, as modified in appeal. CRRP98/09 -:2:- 2.Revision petitioner along with the first respondent now filed a petition as Crl.M.A.10477 of 2009 seeking permission to compound the offence. Having heard either side, I find no reason to reject the petition. Hence, the petition is recorded and the revision petitioner is acquitted under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 320(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and set at liberty. Crl.R.P. is disposed of as above. P.S.Gopinathan, Judge. sl. The first paragraph of the order dated 28.10.2009 in Crl.R.P.98/2009 is substituted as follows: CRRP98/09 -:3:- “The revision petitioner, who is the complainant in S.T.No.2180 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Nilambur prosecuted the first respondent alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court found the first respondent guilty. Accordingly, he was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month and directed to pay Rs.75,000/- as compensation to the revision petitioner with default clause to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. In appeal, the Sessions Court sustained the conviction and the substantive sentence. The direction to pay compensation was set aside. Now this revision, assailing the judgment in appeal so far as it set aside the compensation”, as per order dated 23.11.2009 in Crl.M.A.11153/2009 in Crl.R.P.98/2009. Sd/-Registrar (Judl.) CRRP98/09 -:4:- The words “revision petitioner” occurring in the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph of the order dated 28.10.2009 in Crl.R.P.98/2009 are corrected and substituted by the words “first respondent” as per order dated 23.12.2009 in Crl.M.A.12714 of 2009 in Crl.R.P.98/09. Sd/-Registrar (Judl.)