Posted On by &filed under High Court, Kerala High Court.


Kerala High Court
R.Radhakrishnan vs The State Of Kerala on 17 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1817 of 2010()


1. R.RADHAKRISHNAN, RAGHU VILASOM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. BABURAJ, S/O.KUMARAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.TRIPTEN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN

 Dated :17/06/2010

 O R D E R
                     V.K.MOHANAN, J.
                   -----------------------------
                 Crl.R.P.No.1817 of 2010
                 ---------------------------------
           Dated this the 17th day of June 2010


                          O R D E R

Challenging the judgment dated 12.11.2007 in

S.T.No.38/2007 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-

IV, Kollam and the judgment dated 20.1.2010 of the court of

IIIrd Addl. Sessions Judge, Kollam in Crl.A.No.700/2007, the

accused in a prosecution for the offence punishable under

Sec.138 of the N.I.Act, preferred this revision petition.

2. The case of the complainant is that the accused

borrowed a sum of Rs.30,000/- from the complainant on

20.12.2003 and towards the discharge of the said amount,

Ext.P1 cheque dated 20.1.2004 was issued which when

presented for encashment dishonoured and no amount was

paid in spite of formal notice. Thus, the revision

petitioner/accused has convicted the offence. Based upon

Crl.R.P.No.1817 of 2010

: 2 :

the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P6 documents and

after considering the evidence of defence including the

deposition of DW1 and DW2, the trial court as well as the

lower appellate court has found that the complainant has

established his case against the accused. The above

concurrent findings of the court below is based upon the

evidence and the facts proved during the trial of the case. I

find no reason to interfere with such concurrent finding of

the court below and therefore the conviction imposed

against the revision petitioner is liable to be confirmed.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner

submitted that some breathing time may be granted to the

revision petitioner to pay the compensation amount.

4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of

the case, I am of the view that, with slight modification of

the amount of compensation, the said prayer can be

allowed. Accordingly, the revision petitioner/accused is

directed to appear before the trial court on 17th

Crl.R.P.No.1817 of 2010

: 3 :

September, 2010 to receive the sentence of imprisonment

and he is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.35,000/- as

compensation to the complainant under Sec.357(3) of

Cr.P.C. and on failure to pay the compensation, he is

directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3

months. In case of failure on the part of the revision

petitioner/accused to appear before the trial court as

directed above and making the deposit of compensation

amount, the trial court is free to take coercive steps to

secure the presence of the revision petitioner/accused and

to execute the sentence.

This revision petition is disposed of as above.

V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE.

Jvt


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

93 queries in 0.180 seconds.