IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2010 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3404 of 2003(B) ------------------------------- CRA NO.103/2003 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM C.C.NO.436 OF 2001 OF JFCM-1, KANJIRAPPALLY REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DOMINIC MATHEW, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW, KILROORPARAMPIL, PONKUNNAM. BY ADV. SRI.BOBY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT& STATE. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLILC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. K.J.VARGHESE, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. JOSEPH KILIROORPARAMBIL, PONKUNNAM. ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) FOR R2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = Crl.R.P. No.3404 of 2003 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated, this the 23rd day of March, 2010 O R D E R The accused in C.C.No.436 of 2001 on the file of the J.F.C.M-I, Kanjirappally for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him concurrently by the courts below. 2. Pending this revision, the parties have settled the matter. Crl.M.A.No. 2886 of 2010 has been filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 seeking permission to record the composition entered into between the revision petitioner and the complainant. The said petition has been signed by both the revision petitioner as well as the complainant and their respective counsel. In the light of this development, the aforementioned composition is recorded and it will have the effect of an acquittal of the revision petitioner within the meaning of Sec. 320 (8) Cr.P.C. Money, if any, deposited by the revision petitioner before the trial court pursuant to the orders, if any, passed by the superior courts shall be refunded to the revision petitioner/accused. This Crl. R.P. is disposed of as above. Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. sj