Kerala High Court
V J Francis vs State Of Kerala on 4 July, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.697 of 2024
1
2025:KER:49172
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1947
CRL.REV.PET NO. 697 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 08.04.2024 IN Crl.A
NO.117 OF 2021 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (SPECIAL COURT)-
II, KOTTAYAM / I ADDITIONAL MACT, KOTTAYAM ARISING OUT OF THE
ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 08.11.2021 IN ST NO.66 OF 2018 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - II, ETTUMANOOR
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
V J FRANCIS
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O JOSEPH, VAYALAPALLIMATTATHIL HOUSE, NEERICADU
PO, KATTUVETTIKAVALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686564
BY ADV. SMT.HARITHA SIVADAS
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 SHAJAN V D
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O DEVASIA, VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THIRUVANCHOOR
PO, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686019
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.697 of 2024
2
2025:KER:49172
BY ADVS.
SHRI.S.RANJIT (K/250/1999)
SRI.GOKUL DAS V.V.H.
SR PP, SRI. HRITHWIK C S
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 04.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.697 of 2024
3
2025:KER:49172
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
Crl.Rev.Pet. No.697 of 2024
-------------------------------
Dated this the 04th day of July, 2025
ORDER
The above Criminal Revision Petition is filed seeking
the following reliefs:
"to allow the Criminal Revision Petition and set
aside the Judgment dated 08-04-2024 in Crl. Appeal No:
117 of 2021 of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge II
(Special), Kottayam in ST No: 66 of 2018 of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate Court II, Ettumanoor dated 08- 11-
2021 and acquit the revision petitioner."[SIC]
2. This Criminal Revision Petition is filed against
the finding of conviction and sentence imposed on the Revision
petitioner by the trial court and the appellate court. The
Revision petitioner is the accused in S.T. No.66/2018 on the
file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ettumanoor.
It is a prosecution initiated against the petitioner alleging
2025:KER:49172
offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'NI Act'). The learned
Magistrate after a full fledged trial found that the petitioner is
guilty under Section 138 of the NI Act and he was sentenced
to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a
fine of Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight lakhs only). The petitioner
was directed to pay the fine amount, if any realized, to the
complainant as compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C. In
default of payment of fine amount, the petitioner was directed
to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Aggrieved
by the conviction and sentence, an appeal is filed before the
appellate court. The appellate court, after re-appreciating the
evidence, confirmed the conviction and modified the sentence
imposed by the trial court. Aggrieved by the same, this
Criminal Revision Petition is filed.
3. When this Revision Petition came up for
consideration before this Court on 01.07.2025, there was no
2025:KER:49172
representation for the revision petitioner. There was
representation for the 2nd respondent. Today also there is no
representation for the revision petitioner. The 2nd respondent
appeared through his counsel. Therefore, this Court decided
to hear the revision on merit based on the revision
memorandum and the grounds in the Revision Petition.
4. The jurisdiction of this Court to interfere with
the finding of conviction and sentence invoking the powers of
revisional jurisdiction is very limited. Unless there is illegality,
irregularity and impropriety, this Court need not interfere with
the finding of conviction and sentence. This Court anxiously
considered the impugned judgments and the contentions of
the Revision petitioner. I am of the considered opinion that
there is nothing to interfere with the conviction and sentence
imposed on the petitioner. The trial court and the appellate
court considered the entire evidence and thereafter found that
the petitioner was guilty under Section 138 of the NI Act.
2025:KER:49172
Therefore, there is nothing to interfere with the conviction and
sentence imposed under Section 138 of the NI Act.
Therefore, this Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed,
confirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the
petitioner as per the impugned judgment. Eight months time
is granted to pay the amount and to serve the sentence. All
coercive steps against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance
during the above period.
If any amount is already deposited before the trial court,
the same will be adjusted towards the fine amount, and the
same should be disbursed to the 2nd Respondent in accordance
with law.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE
DM
