KRISHNA SAMY Vs. C R SUKUMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in the above Crl.O.P. is the complainant in C.C.No.71 of 2003 on the file the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udumalaipet. THE complainant filed a complaint against the respondent herein for the alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') in respect of the dishonour of a cheque bearing No.328663 for a sum of Rs.3,00,000 issued by the respondent in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) THE trial Court convicted the accused and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as fine by judgment, dated 24.10.2005 made in C.C.No.71 of 2003. While the accused/respondent herein preferred an appeal against the conviction in C.A.No.482 of 2005 before the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, (FTC No.III), the petitioner herein preferred a revision in Crl.R.C.No.4 of 2006 before the same Court to enhance the sentence imposed on the respondent. Both the said appeal and the revision were heard together and by common judgment, dated 17.3.2006, the learned District Judge dismissed Crl.R.C.No.4 of 2006 and set aside the sentence of imprisonment but confirmed the fine imposed on the respondent.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the trial court did not award compensation in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner had preferred a revision petition. But the Revisional court without assigning any reasons whatsoever not only dismissed the revision petition but also modified the sentence imposed on the respondent to one of fine. THE learned counsel further submitted that the very object of enacting the Negotiable Instruments Act is to make the cheques issued in commercial transactions more acceptable and by enacting stringent provisions of law by providing powers to courts to award compensation.