M J SIBI Vs. JAYAPRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this Crl.R.P. is against the conviction and sentence imposed on the revision petitioner who is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) As this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of conviction, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the sentence of imprisonment ordered against the revision petitioner is unreasonable and exorbitant and therefore a lenient view may be taken and the petitioner may be granted sufficient time to compensate the complainant. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, I am of the view that the said submission of the learned counsel requires positive consideration.

(3.) The cheque in question is dated 29.03.2006, that too, for an amount of Rs.25,000/-. Though the courts below have concurrently found that the said amount is due to the complainant, so far no amount is seen paid to the complainant. Thus, as per the record and findings of the courts below, which upheld by this Court, the said amount is with the revision petitioner for the last 4 years. The apex court, in its recent decision in Damodar S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H (J.T.2010 (4) SC 457), has held that in a case of dishonour of cheques, compensatory aspect of the remedy should be given priority over the punitive aspect. According to me, while granting some time to pay the compensation amount, the interest of complainant is also to be protected. Therefore, the compensation amount can be enhanced slightly considering the fact that the cheque amount is due for the last four years. In the result, this revision petition is disposed of confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Accordingly, while confirming the sentence of imprisonment as modified and fixed by the appellate court and also while confirming the direction to pay compensation, the compensation amount is enhanced to the tune of Rs.30,000/- and the petitioner is directed to pay the amount within three months from today in default he is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 30.06.2011 to receive the sentence of imprisonment and compensation as ordered by this court.