High Court Kerala High Court

M.Raghavan vs Narayanan Nair on 7 October, 2008

Kerala High Court
M.Raghavan vs Narayanan Nair on 7 October, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3338 of 2008()


1. M.RAGHAVAN, S/O NARAYANAN NAMBIAR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. NARAYANAN NAIR, S/O KELU NAIR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.P.SUDHEER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :07/10/2008

 O R D E R
                M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
                   ------------------------------------------
                  CRL.R.P. NO. 3338 OF 2008
                   ------------------------------------------
              Dated this the 7th day of October, 2008


                               O R D E R

Petitioner was concurrently convicted and sentenced for

offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. First

respondent is the complainant. Case of the first respondent is

that towards repayment of Rs.1,50,000/-, which was borrowed by

the petitioner, Ext.P1 cheque drawn in his account maintained in

Perambra branch of State Bank of India was issued and when it

was presented for encashment, it was dishonoured for want of

sufficient funds under Ext.P2 and under Ext.P3 notice served on

the petitioner under Ext.P5 acknowledgement card, the amount

covered under Ext.P1 cheque was demanded. Petitioner failed

to pay the amount and thereby committed the offence.

Petitioner pleaded not guilty.

2. Learned First Class Magistrate, Perambra on the

evidence of PW1 and Exts. P1 to P5 found petitioner guilty. He

was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for six

months and a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- and in default

CRRP 3338/08 2

simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under

section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Petitioner

challenged the conviction and sentence before Sessions Court,

Kozhikode in Crl. Appeal 545 of 2007. Learned Additional

Sessions Judge on reappreciation of evidence confirmed the

conviction and sentence and dismissed the appeal. It is

challenged in this revision petition.

3. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard.

4. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner is not

challenging the conviction, but only the sentence and it may be

modified and petitioner may be granted four months time to pay

the amount covered by the dishonoured cheque. So long as the

sentence is not to be varied or modified against the interest of

first respondent, it is not necessary to issue notice to him.

5. Learned Magistrate and learned Sessions Judge on

the evidence of PW1 found that petitioner had borrowed

Rs.1,50,000/- from first respondent and issued Ext.P1 cheque

drawn in his account, towards its repayment and when it was

presented for encashment it was dishonoured for want of

sufficient funds. I find no reason to interfere with the finding of

the Courts below as it is in accordance with the evidence.

CRRP 3338/08 3

Evidence also establish that first respondent has complied with

all the statutory formalities provided under sections 138 and

142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Conviction of the petitioner

for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act

is therefore perfectly legal and correct.

6. Then the only question is with regard to the sentence.

The learned Magistrate sentenced petitioner to simple

imprisonment for six months in addition to a compensation

which was the amount covered by the cheque with a default

sentence. In view of the declaration of law by the Apex Court,

default sentence cannot be part of the compensation awarded

under section 357(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore

to that extent the sentence is to be modified. From the facts and

circumstances of the case, interest of justice will be met if the

sentence is modified to imprisonment till rising of the Court in

addition to a fine of Rs.1,60,000/- with a default sentence of

simple imprisonment for three months with a direction to pay a

compensation of Rs.1,52,000/- to the first respondent, on

realisation of the fine under section 357(1) of Cr.P.C.

The revision is allowed in part. Conviction of the

petitioner for the offence under section 138 of N.I. Act is

CRRP 3338/08 4

confirmed. The sentence is modified as follows:- Petitioner is

sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the Court and a fine of

Rs.1,60,000/- to be paid within four months from today and in

default simple imprisonment for three months. On realisation of

the fine, Rs.1,52,000/- is to be paid to first respondent as

compensation under section 357(1) of Cr.P.C. Petitioner is

directed to appear before the Magistrate on the expiry of four

months from today.

M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE

Okb/-