M. Arumughan vs State Of Kerala And Anr

The revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced concurrently by the courts below under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in

short, 'the N.I.Act').

Heard.

The courts below correctly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence and concurrently found that the revision petitioner executed Ext.P1

cheque as contemplated under Section 138 of the N.I.Act and 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 of conviction under Section 138 of the N.I.Act by the courts below does not warrant any

interference by this Court.

The courts below awarded a sentence of simple imprisonment for one month and a compensation of Rs.18,394/- to the complainant.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the amount covered by Ext.P1 cheque, I am of the view that the sentence awarded

by the courts below under Section 138 of the N.I.Act can be modified and reduced to a fine of Rs.18,394/-(Rupees Eighteen thousand three hundred

and ninety four only) and in default to simple imprisonment for one month, to meet the ends of justice. It is ordered accordingly. If the fine is

deposited/realized, the entire amount shall be given to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C.

In the result, this Criminal Revision Petition stands allowed in part as above.