IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1733 of 2010()
1. K.N.SABU, KOLLAMPARMBIL VEEDU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DEVADAS.D., SWAMIYARMADOM,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.BIJUMON
For Respondent :SRI.K.P.MADHU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN
Dated :04/06/2010
O R D E R
V.K.MOHANAN, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Crl.R.P.No.1733 of 2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 4th day of June 2010
O R D E R
Crl.M.P.No.5418 of 2010
This is an application filed under Sec.147 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act r/w Sec.320 of Cr.P.C. to
compound the offence under Sec.138 of the N.I.Act, in
which, the revision petitioner is stand convicted and
sentenced against which the above revision petition is filed.
2. In the above petition it is stated that the revision
petitioner/accused has paid the cheque amount and thereby
the complainant as well as the accused have entered into a
compromise and the dispute has been settled out of court
and thus, this petition is being filed. The revision petitioner
has also produced the receipt issued from the Kerala State
Legal Services Authority showing the remittance of
Rs.6,750/- made by the revision petitioner being 15% of the
Crl.R.P.No.1733 of 2010
: 2 :
cheque amount as directed by the Apex Court in the
decision in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babulal. H
represented in J.T.2010(4) SC page 457. Thus, it is
prayed in the above petition that parties may be permitted
to compound the said offence.
3. I have perused the above petition and I am
satisfied with the terms incorporated therein. The petition
is signed by 1st respondent/complainant and the revision
petitioner/accused and countersigned by their respective
counsels. As the parties have settled the matter out of
court it is only proper to allow this petition by permitting
the parties to compound the offence.
In the result, the composition of offence is
recorded and this petition is allowed.
Crl.R.P.No.1733 of 2010
This revision petition is preferred by the accused in a
prosecution for the offence under Sec.138 of the N.I.Act as
he is aggrieved by the conviction and sentence imposed
Crl.R.P.No.1733 of 2010
: 3 :
against him by the judgment dated 19.09.2006 in
S.T.No.220/06 of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the
First Class-I, Kottayam and the judgment dated 17.01.2008
in Crl.Appeal No.635/2006 of the court of Sessions,
Kottayam.
2. Today, this Court by separate order in
Crl.M.P.No.5418/2010 allowed the parties to compound the
offence for which the revision petitioner is stand convicted
and sentenced and the said composition of the said offence
is recorded. The revision petitioner has also deposited a
sum of Rs.6,750/- in the Kerala State Legal Services
Authority as directed by the honourable Apex Court in the
decision in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babulal. H
represented in J.T.2010(4) SC page 457. As the
contesting parties have settled the dispute and compounded
the offence for which the revision petitioner is stand
convicted and sentenced and this Court has also recorded
the composition, I am of the view that this revision petition
Crl.R.P.No.1733 of 2010
: 4 :
can be allowed setting aside the judgments of the courts
below and acquitting the revision petitioner, by virtue of
Sec.320(8) of the Cr.P.C.
In the result, this revision petition is allowed
setting aside the judgments of the courts below and
acquitting the revision petitioner of all the charges levelled
against him and he is set at liberty. The revision petition is
allowed accordingly.
V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE.
Jvt