Kerala High Court
James T. Jose vs Devikulam Taluk Co -Operative ... on 9 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1943
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.281 OF 2021
CRA 48/2019 DATED 05-02-2021 OF SESSIONS COURT,
THODUPUZHA
ST 869/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT,
ADIMALI
REVISION PETITIONER/S:
JAMES T. JOSE
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O. JOSE, RESIDING AT THOTTUMARICKAL HOUSE,
200 ACRE, MANNAMKANDOM POST, ADIMALY,
MANNAMKANDOM VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.S.JIJI
RESPONDENT/S:
1 DEVIKULAM TALUK CO -OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND
RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. NO.136,
HEAD OFFICE, KALLARKUTTY ROAD, ADIMALY IDUKKI-
685561, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 09.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.R.P.No.281 of 2021
-2-
ORDER
Dated this the 09th day of April, 2021
The revision petition is filed challenging
the conviction and sentence in S.T.No.869 of 2015
of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,
Adimaly, as modified by the judgment in Criminal
Appeal No.48 of 2019 of the Sessions Court,
Thodupuzha. The judgment convicting the revision
petitioner was rendered pursuant to a complaint
filed by the first respondent alleging commission
of the offence under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act. The allegation was
that, towards discharge of the first respondent's
debt, the revision petitioner had issued a cheque
for Rs.2,38,817/- in favour of the first
respondent, which, on presentation, had bounced
due to insufficiency of funds. Even though
statutory notice was issued, calling upon the
Crl.R.P.No.281 of 2021
revision petitioner to pay the cheque amount,
the demand was not met.
2. The trial court, after careful scrutiny of
the oral and documentary evidence tendered by the
first respondent, found the cheque to have been
issued towards a legally enforceable debt and
that the cheque was returned for insufficiency of
funds. Consequently, the revision petitioner was
found guilty, convicted and sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment for five months and to pay
fine of Rs.2,38,817/-, in default of which the
revision petitioner is to undergo simple
imprisonment for three months. The appeal filed
by the revision petitioner was allowed in part
and the appellate court, while confirming the
conviction, modified the sentence to imprisonment
till rising of the court and retained the fine as
such.
Crl.R.P.No.281 of 2021
3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the
revision petitioner at length, this Court could
not find any ground for interfering with the
concurrent findings of the trial as well as
appellate court. Thereupon, the learned Counsel
raised an alternative plea that in the event of
this Court being not inclined to entertain the
revision petition, the time limit for remittance
of the fine may be extended.
4. Considering the factual circumstances
and the contentions urged, I am inclined to grant
the limited relief of extending the time limit
for payment of the fine amount. In view of the
limited relief being granted, notice to the first
respondent is dispensed with.
In the result, the Criminal Revision Petition
is allowed in part. The finding of guilt and
conviction is affirmed. The revision
Crl.R.P.No.281 of 2021
petitioner shall remit the fine amount of
Rs.2,38,817/- (Rupees two lakh thirty eight
thousand eight hundred and seventeen only) within
eight months from today. On remittance, the
amount shall be paid to the first respondent as
compensation. The revision petitioner shall pay
the compensation before expiry of the eight
months period, failing which the reliefs granted
under this judgment will stand withdrawn. In
view of the time granted by this Court, coercive
steps based on the impugned judgment shall be
kept in abeyance for eight months.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
Scl/09.04.2021
