IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2011 / 9TH ASHADHA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1598 of 2011 ------------------------------------- CRA.667/2002 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, (ADHOC-I), ERNAKULAM CC.1294/1998 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT ------------------------------ SIVAKUMAR KARTHA, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, SREEHARI HOUSE, PAREKKADU LANE, POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.IEANS.C.CHAMAKKALA RESPONDENTS(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. A.E.SYED KUNJU, ADYAKALAYIL VEEDU, KAVUMKARA KARA, MARKET POST, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680001. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031. BY ADV. SRI.ABHILASH BHASKAR FOR R1 BY ADV.SRI.BINU JOHN FOR R1 BY PUBLIC PRSOSECUTOR SMT.REKHA.C.NAYAR FOR R2. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th 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. Today by a separate order, in Crl.M.A.No. 5668/2011, this Court allowed the parties to compound the offence and accordingly, the composition of the said offence is recorded. The revision petitioner has also complied with the condition of paying cost, as fixed by this Court, 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 Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:2:- parties, 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. 3. In the result, this Crl.Revision petition is allowed setting aside the judgment dated 28.8.2002 in C.C.No.1294 of 1998 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Muvattupuzha and the judgment dated 30.7.2003 in Crl.A.No.667 of 2002 of the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Adhoc-I, Ernakulam 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, JUDGE MBS/ Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:3:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl. M.A.No. 5668 of 2011 in Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of June, 2011. ORDER This is a petition filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I.Act') to compound the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. The dispute is the subject matter of the Crl.R.P. In the petition, it is stated that during the pendency of the cases, the entire matter was amicably settled and the revision petitioner has received the entire amount covered by the cheque in dispute. The first respondent/complainant does not intend to prosecute the matter any further. 2. I have gone through the compounding petition and I am satisfied with the terms and conditions incorporated therein and the petition is signed by both the revision Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:4:- petitioner and the first respondent/complainant and countersigned by their respective counsel. Considering the particular facts and circumstances involved in the case, especially, in the light of the discretion granted to this Court by the Apex Court in the decision reported in Damodar.S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal.H. [JT 2010(4) SC 457], the revision petitioner was permitted to file the compounding petition depositing an amount of `.3500/-, as per order dated 13.6.2011 so as to enable him to move this Court to compound the offence for which he is convicted and sentenced. The revision petitioner has paid a sum of `.3500/- to the Kerala State Legal Services Authority, vide Receipt No. 329 dated 18.6.2011 in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court. As I am satisfied with the terms and averments contained in the compounding petition, which is signed by Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:5:- the revision petitioner as well as the first respondent and countersigned by their respective counsel, permission is granted to compound the above offence and the composition is recorded. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE MBS/ Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:6:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.M.A.No.7087 of 2010 in Unnumbered Crl.R.P.No. of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This is an application to condone the delay of 1735 days occurred in filing the Crl.R.P. 2. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an Ex-Serviceman and after the impugned judgment, the matter has been settled out of court and a compounding petition has also been filed along with the revision petition and there is no contention on merit. 3. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances, especially when the contesting parties settled the matter, I am of the view that the petitioner can be given an opportunity to settle the matter and to redress his Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:7:- grievance. In the result, the delay of 1735 days in filing the Criminal Revision Petition is condoned and the Registry is directed to number the Crl.R.P. V.K.Mohanan, Judge. MBS/ Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:8:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. -------------------------------------------- Crl.A.NO. OF 200 ------------------------------ ------ J U D G M E N T Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:9:- DATED: -2- 2010 Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:10:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. O.P.No. JUDGMENT Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:11:- Dated:.. V.K.MOHANAN, J. O.P.No. JUDGMENT Crl.R.P.No. 1598 of 2011 -:12:- Dated:..