Nishad M.M vs State Of Kerala

K.Babu., J

The challenge in this Crl. Revision Petition is to the judgment dated 31.01.2022 in C.C.No.1032 of 2024 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Ernakulam, and confirmed by the Additional Sessions Court, Ernakulam, in the judgment dated 04.11.2022 in Crl.Appeal No.109 of 2022.

The revision petitioner has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and pay an amount of Rs.1,90,000/- as compensation to the complainant.

The complainant/respondent No.2 filed an application under Section 147 of the NI Act seeking composition of the offence.

The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner is undergoing sentence in the prison and he is not in a position to pay the costs as directed by the Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., (2010) 5 SCC 663: (2010) 2 SCC (Civ) 520 : (2010) 2 SCC (Cri) 1328. The revision petitioner is, therefore, exempted from paying costs.

I have gone through the application seeking composition. It is stated that the entire dispute has been settled and the complainant has no grievance against the revision petitioner/accused. I find no reason to refuse the composition. The composition shall have the effect of acquittal.

The judgment dated 31.01.2022 in C.C. No.214 of 2019 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Ernakulam, and confirmed by the Additional Sessions Court-VI, Ernakulam, in the judgment dated 04.11.2022 in Crl.Appeal No.109 of 2022 stands set aside. The accused is acquitted of the offence alleged.

The Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of accordingly.

The revision petitioner is confined in the Superintendent, District Jail, Kakkanad. The Registry shall forthwith communicate the order to the Superintendent, District Jail. If his custody is not required in any other cases, the Superintendent shall release the revision petitioner today itself.