Santhosh Kumar vs C.R. Chandrakanth Ors

The revision petitionerwas convicted and sentenced by the courts below under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for 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 under Section 138 of the N.I.Act

by the courts below w3as perverse or incorrect. In the said circumstances, the concurrent finding of conviction by the courts below under Section 138

of the N.I.Act, does not warrant any interference by this court.

As regards the sentence, the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner has pleaded for leniency. The learned Counsel for the revision petitioner has

submitted that the petitioner is not having any business at present and hence he is not having any source of income.

Ext.P1 cheque is for Rs.4,50,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh Fifty Thousand Only). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the

submission of the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner and the amount covered by Ext.P1 cheque, I am of the view that the sentence awarded

by the appellate court can be modified and reduced 4to a fine of Rs.5,25,000/-(Rupees Five lakh Twenty Five Thousand Only) with a default clause

for simple imprisonment for two months under Section 138 of the N.I.Act, to meet the ends of justice. It is ordered accordingly. If the fine is realised,

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

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

The revision petitioner is granted six months to pay the fine/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 said

amount shall be released to the complainant5 as part of the compensation.