Kerala HC dismissed a criminal revision petition against conviction and modified sentence for cheque dishonour. The court confirmed conviction but extended time to pay compensation, reducing the default imprisonment to two months.
Five months time granted to pay compensation; default sentence reduced to two months; surrender date fixed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012/25TH SRAVANA 1934
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1799 of 2012 (D)
IN CRL.APPEAL NO.173/2007 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT,THALASSERY IN S.T.C.NO. 369/2006 of J.M.F.C.,TALIPARAMBA
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
SHAJU SEBASTIAN, S/O. SEBASTIAN, AGED 38 YEARS, 46/C, ALAKODE FAMILY QUARTERS ALAKODE P.O., TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.A.SATHEESH
SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI
SRI.J.ABHILASH
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE :
1. KAPPACHERI AMBU, S/O. KUNHAMBU,
AGED 40 YEARS, KAPPACHERI HOUSE, POOVANCHAL, KUTTAPARAMBA P.O., ALAKODE VIA. TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 571.
2. STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM.
R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. BIJU MEENATTOOR
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
===========================
CRL. R.P. NO. 1799 OF 2012
===========================
Dated this the 16th day of August 2012
O R D E R
T his revision petition is directed against the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 173 of 2007 of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Thalassery. The petitioner was the accused in S.T.C.No. 369/2006 of the file of the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Taliparamba. There is concurrent verdict of conviction against the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. As per the impugned judgment while confirming the conviction, the appellate court modified the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner as one to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant under Section 357 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In default of payment of the amount of compensation, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. It is in the said circumstances that this revision petition has been filed.
CRL. R.P. NO. 1799 OF 2012
#2#
evidence on record, both oral and documentary found that Ext. P1 cheque was validly drawn in favour of the 2nd respondent in discharge of a legally enforceable debt and that the petitioner had failed to discharge the said liability despite the receipt of the statutory notice and expiry of the statutorily prescribed period. The appellate court, on a careful evaluation of evidence, found no reason to interfere with the conviction. It is upon satisfying that all the ingredients to attract the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act have been proved against the revision petitioner that the courts below concurrently recorded conviction against him. The petitioner has failed to make out a case to show that there is palpable, perverse appreciation of evidence by the courts below and that it is such consideration that resulted in his conviction. Therefore, the conviction concurrently entered into by the courts below is hereby confirmed.
the substantive sentence of imprisonment and modified the same as imprisonment till the rising of the court. The default sentence was reduced
CRL. R.P. NO. 1799 OF 2012
#3#
to one month while confirming the direction to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation under Section 357 (3) Cr.P.C. No illegality or error or impropriety has been brought out to persuade interference invoking the revisional jurisdiction. In the circumstances, the modified sentence imposed as per the appellate judgment is only to be confirmed and accordingly, it is hereby confirmed.
CRL. R.P. NO. 1799 OF 2012
#4#
compensation directly to the 1st respondent or to deposit the same before the trial court, within the above stipulated time. In case the petitioner fails to pay/deposit the said amount, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months by way of default sentence. To suffer the sentence of imprisonment till the rising of the court the petitioner shall surrender before the trial court on or before 30-10-2012.
Sd/-
C.T. RAVIKUMAR (JUDGE)
kvr/
/True copy/
P.A. to Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction for cheque dishonour should be quashed in light of sentence modification by the appellate court.
Whether the instalment granted for payment of compensation as part of the default sentence is maintainable.
Whether the revised default sentence imposed due to delayed payment is legally sustainable.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shaju Sebastian
Kappacheri Ambu
State of Kerala
C.T. Ravikumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
