Kerala High Court
Sreeja vs T. Gomathi on 7 July, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Crl. Rev. Pet. No.91 of 2025
2025:KER:50171
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1947
CRL.REV.PET NO. 91 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 22.10.2024 IN
Crl.A NO.71 OF 2023 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/SUB COURT
/ COMMERCIAL COURT, MAVELIKKARA ARISING OUT OF THE
ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 30.03.2023 IN CC NO.291 OF 2019 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KAYAMKULAM
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
SREEJA
AGED 45 YEARS, D/O. VALSALA, KOPPARA
THEKKATHIL, CHERAVALLI MURI, KAYAMKULAM
VILLAGE, PIN - 690106
BY ADV SRI.A.SHAFEEK (KAYAMKULAM)
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE:
1 T. GOMATHI
W/O. KRISHNANKUTTY, ANIL BHAVANAM, CHERAVALLI
MURI, KAYAMKULAM VILLAGE, PIN - 690106
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
BY ADVS.
SR PP SRI HRITHWIK C S
SRI.M.R.SASITH
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl. Rev. Pet. No.91 of 2025
2025:KER:50171
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
Crl. Rev. Pet. No.91 of 2025
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 07th day of July, 2025
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Petition is filed against
the conviction and sentence imposed on the Revision
petitioner by the trial court and the appellate court.
2. The Revision petitioner is the accused in
CC No.291/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate Court-II, Kayamkulam. It is a prosecution
initiated against the petitioner alleging 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
2025:KER:50171
Act and she was sentenced to undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of three months and to
pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant
as compensation under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. In
default of payment of the compensation amount, the
petitioner was directed to undergo simple
imprisonment for a further period of one month.
Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence imposed
by the trial court, the petitioner filed an appeal
before the Additional Sessions Court-I. Mavelikkara
as Crl. Appeal No.71/2023. The appellate court, after
re-appreciating the evidence, confirmed the
conviction and modified the sentence imposed by the
trial court. Hence, this Criminal Revision Petition is
filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for
the revision petitioner and the learned Public
2025:KER:50171
Prosecutor. I also heard the learned counsel
appearing for the 1st respondent.
4. The jurisdiction of this Court to interfere
with the concurrent 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 concurrent 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
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. Therefore, there is nothing
to interfere with the conviction imposed under
2025:KER:50171
Section 138 of the NI Act.
5. What remains is the sentence imposed on
the petitioner. The sentence modified by the
appellate court is simple imprisonment for one month
and to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- with a
default sentence of one month. Admittedly, it is a
money transaction which leads to the prosecution. In
such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion
that a substantive sentence of imprisonment is not
necessary. The same can be set aside.
Therefore, this Criminal Revision Petition is
allowed-in-part in the following manner:
1. The conviction imposed on the revision petitioner
as per the impugned judgment is confirmed.
2. The sentence imposed on the revision petitioner
as per the impugned judgment is set aside, and
the revision petitioner is directed to undergo
imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay
2025:KER:50171
compensation of Rs. Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two
Lakh only). In default of payment of the
compensation amount, the petitioner is directed
to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of
one month.
3. The revision petitioner is granted six months
time to pay the compensation amount and to
serve the sentence. Coercive steps against the
petitioner shall be kept in abeyance during the
above period.
4. If any amount is already deposited before the trial
court, the same will be adjusted towards the
compensation amount, and the same should be
disbursed to the 1st respondent in accordance with
law.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
nvj JUDGE
