AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the courts below under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, (for short “the
N.I. Actâ€), 1881.
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, I find no reason to interfere with the concurrent finding of conviction passed by the courts below under Section
138 of the N.I.Act.
As regards the sentence, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner has pleaded for leniency. The revision petitioner produced two receipts
before this Court. One receipt would show that an amount of Rs.7,000/- was paid by the revision petitioner on 03.02.2011. The said amount was
already shown in Ext.P8 statement on 26.02.2011. Therefore, the said receipt has no relevancy at all. Another receipt is dated 25.03.2013. As per the
said receipt, the revision petitioner paid Rs.1,000/-. As per Ext.P1 receipt, the revision petitioner had paid an amount of Rs.16,000/-. Thus, the revision
petitioner had totally paid an amount of Rs.17,000/-, after the filing of the case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the
amount covered by Ext.P1 cheque and also the amount paid by the revision petitioner after filing the complaint, I am of the view that the sentence
awarded by the appellate court can be modified and reduced to a fine of Rs.39,000/- (Rupees thirty nine thousand only) with a default clause for
simple imprisonment for two months, 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 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 complainant as part of the compensation.