Ashokan vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 3932 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

    WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942

                  Crl.Rev.Pet.No.2184 OF 2013(C)

  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRA 238/2011 DATED 14-06-2013 OF
           ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, KOLLAM

  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ST 158/2008 DATED 17-05-2011 OF
        JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - III, KOLLAM


REVISION PETITIONER/S/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

             ASHOKAN
             S/O.CHELLAPPAN, ASWATHY BHAVAN,
             PUTHUKKAD P.O., CHAVARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

             BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

RESPONDENT/S/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:

      1      THE STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
             HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 31.

      2      SATHYAN
             S/O.MADHAVAN, SOUPANAM, 92/A,
             SREEBHADRA NAGAR, ULIYAKOVIL P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT,
             PIN - 691 019.

             R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA
             R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR
             SMT. M. K. PUSHPALATHA, SR.PP

     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
03.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.Rev.Pet.No.2184 OF 2013(C)

                             2

                      O R D E R

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').

2. Heard.

3. The courts below correctly appreciated the oral

and documentary evidence and concurrently found that

the revision petitioner executed Ext.P1 cheque 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 under Section 138 of the

N.I.Act by the courts below was perverse or incorrect. In Crl.Rev.Pet.No.2184 OF 2013(C)

the said circumstances, the concurrent finding of

conviction by the courts below under Section 138 of the

N.I.Act, does not warrant any interference by this court.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of

the case, including the amount covered by Ext.P1

cheque, I am of the view that the sentence awarded by

the courts below can be modified and reduced to

imprisonment till the rising of the court and a

compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh

Only) to the complainant under Section 357 (3) Cr.P.C.,

with a default clause for simple imprisonment for two

months to meet the ends of justice. It is ordered

accordingly.

In the result, this Criminal Revision Petition

stands allowed in part as above.

Crl.Rev.Pet.No.2184 OF 2013(C)

The revision petitioner is directed to surrender

before the trial court on 10.03.2021 to suffer the

imprisonment till the rising of the court.

The revision petitioner is granted ten months to

pay the fine/compensation as requested by the learned

Counsel for the revision petitioner.

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 RK/03.02.2021