MOIDEEN SHAH Vs. JOSEPH MATHEW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The aforecaptioned Revision Petition has been instituted by the revision petitioner accused to impugn the conviction and sentence imposed on him for the offence under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as per the impugned judgment dated 22.10.2007 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Ernakulam, in C.C.No.763/2002, as affirmed by the impugned appellate judgment dated 15.5.2008 of the Court of VIth Addl. Sessions Court, Ernakulam, in Crl.Appeal No.742/2007. The trial court, while convicting the petitioner for the above offence, had sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months and had awarded compensation of Rs.1.4 lakhs to be paid to the complainant and in default thereof, to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of one month.

(2.) The appellate court has confirmed the said conviction and sentence. Aggrieved by the said concurrent findings rendered by both the courts below that the revision petitioner accused has approached this Court by filing the instant revision petition by taking recourse to the remedies under Secs.397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) The gist of the prosecution complaint is that the accused had owed monies to one Sri.A.K.Sarkar of Calcutta, in connection with some transactions relating to rental of some rooms near Ernakulam north and further that the said Sri.A.K.Sarkar had owed certain monies to Dr.Joseph Mathew and that therefore Sri.A.K.Sarkar authorised Dr.Joseph Mathew by instituting a notarised power of attorney in favour of the latter, to collect the monies from the petitioner, which he had owed to Sri.A.K.Sarkar.