High Court Kerala High Court

T.Kunhimoideen vs State Of Kerala on 17 November, 2009

Kerala High Court
T.Kunhimoideen vs State Of Kerala on 17 November, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3417 of 2009()


1. T.KUNHIMOIDEEN, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. A.M.C.MAMMU, S/O.ABDULLA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN

 Dated :17/11/2009

 O R D E R
                      P.S.GOPINATHAN, J.
                ----------------------------------------
                    Crl.R.P.No.3417 of 2009
                ----------------------------------------
         Dated this the 17th day of November, 2009

                               ORDER

The revision petitioner was convicted by the Judicial

Magistrate of the First Class, Thalassery, for offence under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to

simple imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs.5,000/-. He

was ordered to pay Rs.70,000/- to the second respondent as

compensation under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure. In Criminal Appeal No.868 of 2003, the conviction

was confirmed. The sentence was reduced to simple

imprisonment for six months with an order to pay Rs.70,000/- as

compensation to the second respondent.

2. Assailing the legality, correctness and propriety of the

above conviction and sentence, this revision petition was filed.

3. The second respondent took notice and entered

appearance. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner

submitted that he is not assailing the conviction. But the

sentence is assailed. According to the learned counsel, the

revision petitioner is a coolie and he is in his sixties and that he

Crl.R.P.No.3417 of 2009
2

had already deposited the compensation amount before the trial

court and in that circumstances, he is entitled to a little leniency

in sentence.

4. Having heard either side, I find that the submissions

made by the learned counsel deserves merit and that a sentence

of imprisonment till rising of the court and a fine of Rs.70,000/-

would meet the ends of justice.

In the result, this revision petition is allowed in part. While

confirming the conviction, the sentence is reduced to

imprisonment till rising of the court and a fine of Rs.70,000/-. In

default of payment of fine the revision petitioner shall undergo

simple imprisonment for four months. Fine, on realisation shall

be paid to the 2nd respondent as compensation. In the event the

revision petitioner had deposited any amount before the trial

court, the second respondent is at liberty to apply for release of

the amount.

P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE

skj