IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl Rev Pet No. 3641 of 2006()
1. A.SELVAN, S/O.ELIYASAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. E.T.GEEVARGHESE, S/O.THOMAS,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA,
For Petitioner :SRI.J.DEVADANAM
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :18/10/2006
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
CRL.R.P.NO. 3641 OF 2006
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of October, 2006
ORDER
This revision petition is directed against a concurrent
verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution
under Sec.138 of the N.I. Act.
2. The cheque is for an amount of Rs.75,000/-. It bears
the date 16/2/2003. The petitioner now faces a sentence of
imprisonment till rising of court and to pay the actual cheque
amount of Rs.75,000/- as compensation and in default, to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.
3. Signature in the cheque is admitted. Notice of
demand, though duly received and acknowledged, did not
evoke any response. The complainant examined himself as
P.W.1 and proved Exts.P1 to P6. The accused did not adduce
any defence evidence.
4. The courts below came to the conclusion that the
complainant has succeeded in establishing all the ingredients
of the offence punishable under Sec.138 of the N.I. Act.
Accordingly, the courts below proceeded to pass the
CRL.R.P.NO. 3641 OF 2006 2
impugned concurrent judgments.
5. Called upon to explain the nature of the challenge which
the petitioner wants to mount against the impugned concurrent
judgments, the learned counsel for the petitioner does not strain
to assail the verdict of guilty, conviction, sentence, direction for
payment of compensation or the default sentence. The counsel
makes a short request that the petitioner may be given three
months further time to pay the amount and avoid the default
sentence.
6. Having gone through the impugned concurrent
judgments, I reckon that as an informed and fair stand taken by
the learned counsel for the petitioner. In the absence of
challenge on any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to
advert to the facts in any greater detail in this order. Suffice it to
say that the verdict of guilty and conviction are found to be
absolutely justified and unexceptionable.
7. Leniency and indulgence to the extent possible have
already been shown to the petitioner by the courts below. I find
no space for any further leniency. I do not find much merit in
the prayer for any long further period of time to pay the amount
and avoid the default sentence. However, I am satisfied that the
CRL.R.P.NO. 3641 OF 2006 3
petitioner can be granted time till 30/12/2006 to appear before
the learned Magistrate to serve the impugned sentence.
8. In the result, this revision petition is dismissed; but with
the observation that the sentence shall not be executed till
30/12/2006. The petitioner shall appear before the learned
Magistrate on 30/12/2006. If the petitioner does not appear
before the learned Magistrate as directed, the learned Magistrate
shall thereafter proceed to execute the impugned sentence.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
CRL.R.P.NO. 3641 OF 2006 4