IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 15TH POUSHA, 1942
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.8 OF 2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ST 1193/2009 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS, THIRUVALLA
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRA 26/2015 DATED 18-08-2017 OF
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT -IV, PATHANAMTHITTA
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
K.P.SOMAN
PLAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
PODIYADI P.O, THIRUVALLA,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN
SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV
SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR
SRI.T.H.VISHNU
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
1 SOSAMMA MATHAI
VANCHIPALAM CHIRAYIL HOUSE,
THIRUVAMBADI MURI, KAVUMBHAGOM,
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689 102.
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
KOCHI 682 031.
R1 BY ADV. SMT.GANGA A.SANKAR
R1 BY ADV. SRI.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL
R2 BY SMT. M. K. PUSHPALATHA, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
05.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.8 OF 2018
-2-
ORDER
The revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the courts below under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, (for short "the N.I. Act"), 1881.
2. Heard.
3. The courts below correctly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence and concurrently found that the revision petitioner executed Exts.P1 and P1(a) cheques as contemplated under Section 138 of the N.I.Act and committed the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. No material has been brought to the notice of this Court to indicate that the appreciation of evidence or the concurrent finding of conviction by the courts below was perverse or incorrect. In the said circumstances, the concurrent finding of conviction by Crl.Rev.Pet.No.8 OF 2018 -3- the courts below under Section 138 of the N.I.Act does not warrant any interference by this Court. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the amount covered by Exts.P1 and P1(a) cheques, I am of the view that the sentence awarded by the appellate court can be modified and reduced to a fine of Rs.1,75,000/- (Rupees one lakh seventy five thousand only) with a default clause for simple imprisonment for two months, to meet the ends of justice. It is ordered accordingly. If the fine is realised, the entire amount shall be given to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1)(b) Cr.P.C.
In the result, this revision petition stands allowed in part as above.
The revision petitioner is granted ten months to pay the fine/compensation as requested by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner. Crl.Rev.Pet.No.8 OF 2018 -4- Needless to state that if the revision petitioner had already deposited any amount before the trial court pursuant to the direction of this Court, the said amount shall be released to the complainant as part of the compensation.
Sd/-
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR JUDGE Nkr/05.01.2021.