K.B. Binu vs S. Sreekanth And Anr

The revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the courts below under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (for short “the

N.I.Actâ€​).

Heard.

The courts below correctly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence and concurrently found that the revision petitioner committed the

offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. No material has been brought to the notice of this Court to indicate that the appreciation of evidence or the

concurrent finding of conviction by the courts below was perverse or incorrect. In the said circumstances, the concurrent finding by the courts below

that the revision petitioner committed the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act does not warrant any interference by this Court. The sentence

awarded by the appellate court also does not warrant any interference by this Court.

In the result, this Revision Petition stands dismissed.

The revision petitioner shall surrender before the trial court on 18.01.2021 to suffer the sentence of imprisonment till the raising of the court.

The revision petitioner is granted six months to pay the compensation as requested by the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner.

Needless to state that if the revision petitioner had already deposited any amount before the trial court pursuant to the direction of this court, the first

respondent herein, who is the complainant before the trial court, is entitled to collect the said amount from the court concerned.