VIJAYACHANDRAN Vs. MURALIDHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. THE trial court convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months as per judgment dated 04/12/1999 in S.T.Case No.514/99. THE conviction was confirmed by the appellate court and the sentence was modified by directing the appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C to the complainant and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month (vide judgment dated 05/08/2003 in Crl.A.No.01/2000).

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused and the learned counsel for the 1st respondent/complainant. The learned Public Prosecutor is also heard.

(3.) A concurrent finding of guilty and conviction is there against the revision petitioner by the trial court as well as by the appellate court. About 12 years is already elapsed after the issuance of the disputed cheque. In the absence of challenge on any specific grounds, it is not necessary for me to advert to facts in any greater detail. Therefore the verdict of guilty and conviction do not warrant any interference and the same is confirmed. Only the cheque amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been ordered as compensation by the appellate court. Considering the lapse of 12 years after the issuance of cheque, I find that the compensation amount ordered by the appellate court at Rs.1,00,000/- should be enhanced to Rs.1,10,000/-. The revision petitioner can be granted three months time to pay/deposit the amount of compensation (less any amount already paid/deposited) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.