Kerala High Court
Jeny Babu vs State Of Kerala on 4 July, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.1196 of 2023
1
2025:KER:49170
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1947
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1196 OF 2023
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 19.09.2023 IN Crl.A
NO.188 OF 2019 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (SPECIAL COURT)-
II, KOTTAYAM / I ADDITIONAL MACT, KOTTAYAM ARISING OUT OF
THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 06.11.2019 IN ST NO.100 OF 2016 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - III, KANJIRAPPALLY
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
JENY BABU
AGED 44 YEARS
W/O LATE BABU, KUNNUMPURATHU HOUSE, MANIMALA P.O
MANIMALA VILLAGE, PIN - 686543
BY ADVS.
SMT.PREEJA V.P.
SRI.V.P.PRASANTH
SMT.VARSHA S.
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.1196 of 2023
2
2025:KER:49170
2 SREE GOKULAM CHIT AND FINANCE COMPANY PVT. LTD
WITH ITS CENTRAL OFFICE AT NO. 66, ARCOT ROAD,
KODAMPAKAM, CHENNAI-600024, IS HAVING ITS
DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT PARAKKAATTU BUILDING 1ST
FLOOR, CENTRAL JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM , REPRESENTED BY
ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. SIBU,
PIN - 686001
BY ADV.
SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT
PP, SRI. SANAL P RAJ
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 04.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.1196 of 2023
3
2025:KER:49170
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.1196 of 2023
-------------------------------
Dated this the 04th day of July, 2025
ORDER
The above Criminal Revision Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
"to allow this revision petition and set aside the judgment dated 19-09-2023 in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge-II (Special) Kottayam in Criminal Appeal No.188/2019 and the judgment in S.T.No.100/ 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Kanjirapally and acquit the revision petitioner/appellant/accused in the interest of justice."[SIC]
2. This Criminal Revision Petition is filed against the 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.100/2016 Crl.Rev.Pet. No.1196 of 2023 4 2025:KER:49170 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Kanjirappally. It is a prosecution initiated against the petitioner alleging offence punishable 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 she was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a sum of Rs.2,56,181/- (Rupees Two lakh fifty six thousand one hundred and eighty one only) to the complainant under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. In default of payment of the compensation amount, the petitioner was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 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 modified the sentence imposed by the trial court. Hence, this Criminal Revision Petition is filed. Crl.Rev.Pet. No.1196 of 2023 5
2025:KER:49170
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Revision petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The jurisdiction of this Court to interfere with the 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 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.1196 of 20236
2025:KER:49170 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. All coercive steps against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance during the above period.
If any amount is already deposited before the trial court, the same will be adjusted towards the compensation amount, and the same should be disbursed to the 2nd Respondent in accordance with law.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE DM