Jaina Babu vs M/S.Klm Chit Syndicate
2021 Latest Caselaw 7329 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

 TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                 Crl.Rev.Pet.No.2062 OF 2012(C)

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRA 46/2012 DATED 03-07-2012
               OF SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ST 243/2008 DATED 23-11-2011
       OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ADIMALI


REVISION PETITIONER/S:

              JAINA BABU,W/o.BABU,
              TRANQUIL RESIDENCY,
              FLAT NO.5/2B, CHEMBU MUKKU,
              VAZHALAKA, KOCHI-21

              BY ADV. SRI.S.JIJI

RESPONDENT/S:

      1       M/S.KLM CHIT SYNDICATE,
              1ST FLOOR, MATHEWSON TRADE CENTRE, KALOOR,
              COCHIN REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY
              HOLDER AND MANAGER MR.ABDUL LATHEEF K.S.,
              S/O.ABDHUL SYED AGED 38 YEARS,
              PALLARIMANGALAM P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM.

      2       STATE OF KERALA,
              REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
              HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

              R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.DILEEP (KALLAR)


OTHER PRESENT:

              SMT.M.K. PUSHPALATHA, SR.PP

     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 02.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
 Crl.R.P.No.2062 of 2012


                                      -2-




                                  ORDER

The revision petitioner was convicted

and sentenced by the courts below under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act (in 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.P5 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 Crl.R.P.No.2062 of 2012

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

under Section 138 of the N.I.Act does not

warrant any interference by this Court. The

sentence awarded by the appellate court also

does not warrant any interference by this

Court.

In the result, this Revision

Petition stands dismissed.

The revision petitioner shall

surrender before the trial court on 7.4.2021

to suffer the sentence of imprisonment till

the rising of the court awarded by the

appellate court.

Crl.R.P.No.2062 of 2012

The revision petitioner is granted

six months to pay the compensation as

requested by the learned counsel for the

revision petitioner.

Sd/-

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE STK