Kerala High Court
Anitha K.C vs Jayaprakash on 3 July, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
2025:KER:48732
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JULY 2025 / 12TH ASHADHA, 1947
CRL.REV.PET NO. 994 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.08.2023 IN Crl.A
NO.89 OF 2021 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT - II,
ALAPPUZHA ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.04.2021 IN
ST NO.34 OF 2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS
-III, CHERTHALA
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT.ACCUSED:
ANITHA K.C.
AGED 48 YEARS
D/O CHOTHI, KARIYATTUKUNNEL HOUSE, KADAYIRIPPU
P.O., KOLENCHERRY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682311
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.KABIL CHANDRAN
SMT.R.ANJALI
SMT.AAYSHATH NAJILA SCHEMNAD
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.1 & STATE/COMPLAINANT:
1 JAYAPRAKASH
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O. NARAYANAN, AYYANKULANGARA HOUSE,
NORTH ARYAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688538
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.994 of 2023
2025:KER:48732
..2..
BY ADVS.
SMT.M.A.SULFIA
SRI.ABDUL JALEEL.A
OTHER PRESENT:
SR PP SMT SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 03.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.994 of 2023
2025:KER:48732
..3..
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
-------------------------------------
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.994 of 2023
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2025
ORDER
The above Criminal Revision Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
" to set aside the Judgment dated 17.04.2021 in S.T. No. 34/2019 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Cherthala and later confirmed by the Additional Sessions Court - II, Alappuzha by Judgment dated 22.08.2023 in Crl. Appeal. No. 89/2021."[SIC]
2. This Criminal Revision Petition is filed against the concurrent finding of conviction and sentence imposed on the Revision petitioner by the trial court and the appellate court. The Revision petitioner is the accused in S.T. No.34/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Cherthala. It is a prosecution initiated against the petitioner alleging offence punishable Crl.Rev.Pet. No.994 of 2023 2025:KER:48732 ..4..
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'NI Act'). The learned Magistrate after a full fledged trial found that the petitioner is guilty under Section 138 of the NI Act and he was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.4,50,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh fifty thousand only) and the fine amount if recovered shall be given to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of the fine amount, the petitioner was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, an appeal is filed before the appellate court. The appellate court, after re-appreciating the evidence, confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court. Hence, this Criminal Revision Petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Revision petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. Crl.Rev.Pet. No.994 of 2023
2025:KER:48732 ..5..
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner raised a contention that the complainant has no source to lend an amount of Rs.4 lakh. But this Court perused the evidence adduced by the complainant. The evidence of the complainant would show that he was a canteen contractor and the canteen was attached to a hospital. He was also working in a semi-government establishment. He also gave evidence that he was having fixed deposit with a District Co-operative Bank, Alappuzha for an amount of Rs.8 lakh. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the complainant has not produced any document to show that he has such means. If that is the case, such a burden to prove is not there on the complainant. Once complianant adduced evidence, the burden shifts to the accused. The accused has not adduced any evidence to rebut that presumption. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that there is no Crl.Rev.Pet. No.994 of 2023 2025:KER:48732 ..6..
merit in the contention raised by the petitioner. Moreover two courts have concurrently found against the petitioner.
5. The jurisdiction of this Court to interfere with the concurrent finding of conviction and sentence invoking the powers of revisional jurisdiction is very limited. Unless there is illegality, irregularity and impropriety, this Court need not interfere with the concurrent finding of conviction and sentence. This Court anxiously considered the impugned judgments and the contentions of the Revision petitioner. I am of the considered opinion that there is nothing to interfere with the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner. The trial court and the appellate court considered the entire evidence and thereafter found that the petitioner was guilty under Section 138 of the NI Act. Therefore, there is nothing to interfere with the conviction and sentence imposed under Section 138 of the NI Act. Crl.Rev.Pet. No.994 of 2023
2025:KER:48732 ..7..
6. Therefore, this Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner as per the impugned judgment. Twelve months time is granted to pay the amount and to serve the sentence.
If any amount is already deposited before the trial court, the same will be adjusted towards the compensation/fine amount, and the same should be disbursed to the Respondent in accordance with law. Coercive steps against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance during the above period.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE ds 03.07.2025