GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR Vs. NALINAKUMARI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition is filed challenging the concurrent findings of conviction entered and the sentence imposed on the Revision Petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the N.I. Act') in Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 2010 on the files of the V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram. The above appeal was filed challenging the judgment finding that the Revision Petitioner is guilty of the said offence, passed in S.T. No. 367 of 2006 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court -VIII, Thiruvananthapuram. According to the impugned judgment, the Revision Petitioner is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,00,000/ -. Fine amount if paid shall be given to the complainant as compensation under Sec. 357(1) of the Cr.P.C. in default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for another period of one month.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner reiterated the contentions which were raised before the courts below and got rejected concurrently. The learned counsel urged for a re -appreciation of evidence once again, which is not permissible under the revisional jurisdiction unless any kind of perversity is found in the appreciation of evidence. The Revision Petitioner failed to point out any kind of perversity in the appreciation of evidence or illegality or impropriety in the findings whereby the trial court convicted him.

(3.) THIS Court is satisfied that the courts below had meticulously evaluated the evidence on record. I do not find any kind of illegality or impropriety in the said findings or perversity in appreciation of evidence, from which the above findings had been arrived. Therefore, I am not inclined to re -appreciate entire evidence once again and I confirm the concurrent findings of conviction.