Kerala High Court
Sabulal T. S vs M/S.Jubilee Auto Hire Purchase on 19 June, 2025
Author: P.V. Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
2025:KER:43902
CRL.REV.PET NO. 207 OF 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 29TH JYAISHTA, 1947
CRL.REV.PET NO. 207 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 23.12.2020 IN Crl.A
NO.111 OF 2018 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,THRISSUR
ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 05.03.2018 IN ST
NO.126 OF 2017 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -
VI, THRISSUR
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
SABULAL T. S.
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O. SIVARAMAN, THAZHATH HOUSE, KOZHUKULLY P. O.,
MOORKANIKKARA, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 751.
BY ADVS.
SRI.C.A.CHACKO
SMT.C.M.CHARISMA
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
1 M/S.JUBILEE AUTO HIRE PURCHASE
P. V. COMPLEX, CIVIL LANE ROAD, WEST FORT,
THRISSUR - 680004.
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2025:KER:43902
CRL.REV.PET NO. 207 OF 2021
2
BY ADV SHRI.D.ANIL KUMAR
OTHER PRESENT:
SR PP SRI HRITHWIK C S
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 19.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:43902
CRL.REV.PET NO. 207 OF 2021
3
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
Crl.R.P. No.207 of 2021
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of June, 2025
ORDER
The above Criminal Revision Petition is filed seeking the
following reliefs:
"to set aside the judgments in Crl.A.No.111/2018
dated 23/12/2020 of Sessions Court. Thrissur and
in ST.No.126/2017 dated 5/3/2018 of Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court-VI, Thrissur, so as to secure
the ends of justice."
(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.126/2017 on the file
of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VI, Thrissur. It is a
prosecution initiated against the revision 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 revision
2025:KER:43902
CRL.REV.PET NO. 207 OF 2021
petitioner is guilty under Section 138 of the NI Act and he was
sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and
to pay a fine of Rs.1,83,600/- (Rupees One Lakh eighty three
thousand six hundred only). In default of payment of the fine
amount, the revision 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. Hence, this Criminal Revision Petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision
petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The counsel for the revision petitioner raised two
points. The counsel submitted that Ext.P2 is a notice issued by
the complainant. As per Ext.P2, the installment due is
mentioned as 10 installments (Rs.5,400 X 10 = Rs.54,000/-).
Ext.P2 notice was received on 15.03.2013. The cheque was
issued on 18.03.2013. The specific case of the revision
petitioner is that when in Ext.P2 notice it is stated that the
amount due as only Rs.53,000/-, which is dated only on
2025:KER:43902
CRL.REV.PET NO. 207 OF 2021
13.03.2013, the contention of the complainant that the revision
petitioner issued a cheque on 18.03.2013 with an amount of
Rs.1,83,600/- cannot be accepted. But there is an explanation
to this to the complainant. The complainant stated that when
the accused approached the complainant, the vehicle was
already sold. But the counsel for the revision petitioner again
relied on Ext.D6 registration certificate. For that also there is
an explanation from the side of the complainant that there was
some delay in approaching the registering authority for
transferring the registration certificate. As I mentioned earlier
this is a revision filed against the conviction and sentence. Two
courts found concurrently against the revision petitioner. The
evidence adduced by the complainant and the accused were
considered in detail by the trial court and the appellate court. I
see no reason to interfere with the same.
5. 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
2025:KER:43902
CRL.REV.PET NO. 207 OF 2021
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 revision petitioner. The trial court and the appellate
court considered the entire evidence and thereafter found that
the revision petitioner was guilty under Section 138 of the NI
Act. 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 in
the following manner:
1. The conviction and sentence imposed on the
revision petitioner as per the impugned
judgment are confirmed.
2. Six months time is granted to pay the amount
and to serve the sentence.
3. If any amount is deposited, the same will be
adjusted towards the fine amount.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV JUDGE
