Kerala High Court
Santhosh.T.V vs State Of Kerala on 13 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 23TH POUSHA, 1942
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.30 OF 2015
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRA 368/2014 DATED 25-10-2014 OF
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT(SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL FOR MARADU
CASES) KOZHIKODE
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 416/2011 DATED 19-05-2014 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,THAMARASSERY
REVISION PETITIONER:
SANTHOSH.T.V.
S/O.UNNIKUTTY, THACHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
ANAKKAMPEYIL, THIRUVAMBADY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.ABHILASH
SRI.K.SIJU
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
2 KOZHIKODE PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT BANK, KOZHIKODE
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
P.LOHITHAKSHAN.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN
R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER
R1 BY SMT. M. K. PUSHPALATHA, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
13.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.30 OF 2015
-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 Ext.P4 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 by the courts below was
perverse or incorrect. In the said circumstances, the
concurrent finding of conviction by the courts below
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.30 OF 2015
under Section 138 of the N.I.Act does not warrant any
interference by this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner
has pleaded for leniency in the matter of sentence.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
including the amount covered by Ext.P4 cheque, and the
submission of the learned counsel for the revision
petitioner and the learned counsel for the second
respondent, I am of the view that the sentence awarded
by the appellate court can be modified and reduced to a
fine of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs 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.
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.30 OF 2015
In the result, this criminal 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.
Sd/-
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
JUDGE
Nkr/13.01.2021
