Kerala High Court
Dayana vs Syamlal on 5 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 15TH POUSHA, 1942
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.415 OF 2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRA 265/2016 DATED 28-02-2018 OF
II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT,TRIVANDRUM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 96/2013 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
FIRST CLASS -III, NEDUMANGAD
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
DAYANA
W/O PRAVEEN,
RAJEEV BHAVAN, KAVARA,
VENJARAMOODU.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.V.A.VINOD
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 SYAMLAL
S/O.SASIDHARAN, BANGLOWIL VEEDU,
VENJARAMOODU.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695607.
2 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM-682031.
R1 BY ADV. K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)
R1 BY ADV. P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM)
R1 BY ADV. S.VIBHEESHANAN
R1 BY ADV. K.SUDHINKUMAR
R1 BY ADV. S.K.ADHITHYAN
R1 BY ADV. MUHAMMED IBRAHIM ABDUL SAMAD
R2 BY SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
05.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.415 OF 2018
-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.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 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.415 OF 2018
under Section 138 of the N.I.Act does not warrant any
interference by this Court. 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 a fine of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two
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.
In the result, this 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.
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.415 OF 2018
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
Nkr/05.01.2021
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.415 OF 2018
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL
