SASIKUMAR Vs. USHADEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) What's the sentence to be imposed on an accused convicted for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is the question that arises for consideration?

(2.) The revision petitioner had filed C.C.No.164/2009 before the Court of the Judicial First-Class Magistrate-II, Alappuzha, alleging the first respondent to have committed the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act('Act' in short). The learned Magistrate convicted the first respondent for the said offence and sentenced her to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000.00; and if the fine amount was realised, the same to be paid to the revision petitioner as compensation under Sec. 357 (1) (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, 'Code'). Challenging the judgment, the first respondent filed Crl.A. No.4/2010 before the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Alappuzha. The Appellate Court, by the impugned judgment, upheld the conviction but further reduced the substantive sentence by ordering the first respondent to undergo simple imprisonment for one day (till the rising of the Court) and pay a compensation of Rs.25,000.00 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month.

(3.) It is aggrieved by the inadequacy of the sentence; the revision petition is filed.