Full Judgment
Crl. R.P. No.475 of 2023 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1945 CRL.REV.PET NO. 475 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTST 88/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III, ALAPPUZHA CRA 109/2022 OF DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT MUJEEB RAHMAN AGED 42 YEARS PALAMMOTTIL HOUSE ZAKARIA WARD, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688012 BY ADVS. K.DHRUV KUMAR SHAKTHI PRAKASH HARIKRISHNAN M.S. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 NIYAS L. MUSALIYAR VALAPPIL, VALIYAKULAM WARD, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
OTHER PRESENT: PP M.C.ASHI THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Crl. R.P. No.475 of 2023 2 V.G.ARUN J. ------------------------------------- Crl. R.P. No.475 of 2023 --------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of April 2023
ORDER
The revision petitioner is the the accused in S.T. No.88 of 2019 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Alappuzha. The case originated from a complaint filed by the 1 st respondent alleging commission of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The allegation was that, in full and final
settlement of the debt due to the complainant, the revision petitioner issued a cheque for Rs.3,00,000/- which, on presentation, was dishonoured with the endorsement 'funds insufficient". In spite of being served with notice demanding
payment of the cheque amount, the petitioner did not send a reply or pay the amount.
2. The trial court, on evaluation of evidence and consideration of the legal contentions, found the revision petitioner Crl. R.P. No.475 of 2023 3 guilty and thereupon, convicted and sentenced him to undergo
simple imprisonment for two months and to pay a fine of Rs.3,00,000/-, with default sentence of simple imprisonment for 15 days. The fine, if remitted, was directed to be paid as compensation to the complainant. The appellate court, after detailed consideration of the legal and factual contentions, allowed the appeal in part, by affirming the conviction and reducing the substantive sentence to imprisonment till the rising of the court. The direction to remit fine amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was also upheld and the sentence enhace to simple imprisonment or one month.
3. Heard, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the first respondent/complainant.
4. Although detailed arguments were advanced by the learned
counsel for the petitioner assailing the trial and appellate court judgments, a careful scrutiny of the judgments reveals that the trial court had properly appreciated the evidence and correctly applied the legal principles. These findings having been affirmed in appeal, after reappreciation of evidence and re-consideration of the legal contentions, I find no reason to invoke the revisional jurisdiction.
5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner Crl. R.P. No.475 of 2023 4 submitted that the time granted for remitting the fine may be extended.
6. I find the request to be reasonable. The Crl. Revision petition accordingly is dismissed and the revision petitioner granted six months time for paying/remitting the fine amount. If the petitioner fails to pay/remit the fine within the extended time, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The non-bailable warrant, if any pending against the petitioner, shall be kept in abeyance for six months. Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE dpk