IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2008 / 20TH POUSHA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 52 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRA.66/2007 of SESSIONS COURT, KASARAGOD STC.1879/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, HOSDRUG .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- K.P.ABDUL KHADER, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O ABDULLA HAJI, KALANAD P.O., KALANAD VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS SMT.T.T.JAYANTHY RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT ----------------------- 1. K.SIVANANDA, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O LINGAPPAYYA, RESIDING AT K.S.VIHAR, ARATTUKADAVU, BEKAL P.O., PALLIKKARA VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Crl. R.P. No. 52 OF 2008 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 10th day of January, 2008 O R D E R This revision petition is directed against a concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I Act. After the modification of the sentence by the appellate court, the petitioner faces the sentence of imprisonment till rising of court and to pay the actual cheque amount of Rs.45,000/- only as compensation and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. 2. The cheque is for an amount of Rs.45,000/-. It bears the date 10.5.2007. Signature in the cheque is admitted. Notice of demand though duly received and acknowledged, did not evoke any response. Before the learned Magistrate, the complainant examined himself as PW1. The accused examined himself as DW1. No documents were marked on the side of the accused. The Crl.R.P.52/08 : 2 : cheque was not issued for the due discharge of any legally enforcible debt or liability and was issued only as security. This was the short contention raised in the trial court. 3. The courts below concurrently came to the conclusion that the complainant has succeeded in establishing all ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. The accused has not succeeded in proving his case or even in generating a reasonable doubt about the case of the complainant. Accordingly they proceeded to pass the impugned concurrent judgments. 4. Called upon to explain the nature of challenge, which the petitioner wants to mount against the impugned concurrent judgments, the learned counsel for the petitioner does not strain to assail the verdict of guilty and conviction on merits. The learned counsel only prays that some further time may be granted to the accused to raise and pay the compensation amount and thus avoid the default sentence. 5. The cheque bears the date 2005. No part of the Crl.R.P.52/08 : 3 : amount has been paid so far. In these circumstances, I do not find much merit or grace in the claim for any further period of time. But, I am satisfied that the petitioner can be given a short breathing time to raise and pay the compensation amount and thus avoid the default sentence. 6. In the result :- a) This Crl.R.P is allowed in part; b) The impugned verdict of guilty and conviction of the petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I Act are upheld in all respects but it is directed that the petitioner shall have time till 29.2.08 to make the payment. The petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on or before 1.3.08 for execution of the impugned sentence. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks