SAJEEV Vs. M RAVINDRAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision petition is filed by the accused in C.C. No. 1136 of 1999 on the file of the J.F.C.M. Court-II, Ernakulam challenging the conviction and sentence passed against him for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act. The cheque amount was Rs.1,00,000/-. In the Trial Court, the accused was convicted and he is sentenced to undergo S.I. for a period of nine months and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo S.I. for a further period of 30 days under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The appeal filed against that conviction and sentence was allowed in part confirming the conviction and modifying the sentence. The accused was sentenced to undergo S.I. for three months and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default to undergo S.I. for three months. He was directed to surrender before the court to undergo the sentence of imprisonment.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the revision petitioner, learned counsel for the complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) IN the decision reported in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H (2010(2) KHC 428 (SC)), it was held that in a case of dishonour of cheques, compensatory aspect of the remedy should be given priority over the punitive aspect. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that sentencing the accused to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- would meet the ends of justice. The said fine shall be paid as compensation under Section 357(1) of Cr.P.C. The Revision petitioner is permitted either to deposit the said fine amount before the Court below or directly pay the compensation to the complainant within six months from today and to produce a memo to that effect before the Trial Court in case of direct payment. If he fails to deposit or pay the said amount within the aforesaid period, he shall suffer simple imprisonment for three months by way of default sentence. The amount if any deposited in the trial court by the accused can be given credit to.