HARINARAYANAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS revision petitioner and the respondents in all these revision petitions are the same and similar questions are involved, these revision petitions are heard together and disposed of by a common order.

(2.) THE revision petitioner is the accused and the 2nd respondent is the complainant in S.T.Nos.231/2006, 890/2006, 891/2006 and C.C. No.341/2002 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-III, Thrissur. THE revision petitioner/accused was convicted under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of court and to pay a compensation of Rs. 1,05,000/- in S.T.No.231/2006, Rs. 1,00,000/- in S.T. No.890/2006, Rs. 1,05,000/- in S.T. No.891/2006 and Rs. 1,20,000/- in C.C. No.341/2002 and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months in each case by the learned Magistrate by judgment dated December 5, 2006. On appeal by the accused, the learned Sessions Judge by the common judgment dated February 19, 2010 confirmed his conviction and sentence. THE accused has come up in revision challenging his conviction and sentence.

(3.) ON an appreciation of the evidence, the trial court found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and convicted him thereunder. In S.T. No.231/2006 the accused was sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of court and to pay a compensation of Rs. 1,05,000/- to the complainant, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. In S.T. No.890/2006 he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of court and to pay a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the complainant, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. In S.T. No.891/2006 he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of court and to pay a compensation of Rs. 1,05,000/- to the complainant, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. In C.C. No.341/2002 he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of court and to pay a compensation of Rs. 1,20,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. ON appeal by the accused, the lower appellate court confirmed his conviction and sentence. The accused has come up in revision challenging his conviction and sentence.