The court upheld conviction for cheque dishonor under the Negotiable Instruments Act, allowing time to remit the fine.

ORDER

The concurrent verdicts of the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (NI Act cases), Kozhikode and the Sessions Court, Kozhikode, in CC No.2559/2015 and Crl.Appeal No.306/2017 respectively, convicting and sentencing the petitioner for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , 1881, are under challenge in this revision.

2. The case relates to the dishonour of a cheque dated

05.09.2012 for an amount of Rs.4 lakh, which the petitioner issued to the 1st respondent/complainant. After a detailed evaluation of the evidence adduced by the complainant through the oral testimonies of PW1 and PW2 and the documents marked as Exts.P1 to P5, and also after considering the reply notice marked from the part of the accused as Ext.D1, the learned Magistrate found the petitioner guilty of commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and convicted her thereunder. The petitioner was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.4 lakh, with a default clause of Simple Imprisonment for 4 months. It was further directed that the fine amount, if realised, shall be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357 (1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure . Though the petitioner challenged the aforesaid verdict in appeal, the learned Sessions Judge concurred with the findings of the learned Magistrate and dismissed the appeal, confirming the conviction and sentence. It is aggrieved by the above concurrent verdicts of the courts below, that the petitioner is here before this Court with this revision petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

4. On going through the judgment rendered by the Trial Court, it is seen that the learned Magistrate had taken into account all the relevant facts and circumstances of the case as borne out of the evidence on record, and arrived at the correct finding that the complainant has successfully established through the aforesaid evidence that the petitioner committed offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act . The aforesaid evidence was once again subjected to reappraisal by the learned Sessions Judge, who found that there is absolutely no reason to take a different view from that, which was found by the Trial Court.

Having regard to the reasonings adopted by the Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court in the impugned judgments, and also the facts borne out of the records, I am of the view that there is absolutely no ground to invoke the revisional powers of this Court, to interfere with the aforesaid concurrent findings. The courts below have wisely limited the sentence by imposing a fine Rs.4 lakh, which is the cheque amount, and mulcting the petitioner with the liability to undergo imprisonment, only in case of non-payment of the aforesaid amount. The sentence awarded in the above regard does not require any modification. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is reeling under severe financial constraints and that a breathing time may be granted to her for remittance of the fine amount.

5. Having regard to the above submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to grant a period of three months’ time for the petitioner to remit the fine amount imposed by the courts below.

In the result, the revision petition stands disposed of as follows:

1) The concurrent findings of the courts below, convicting and sentencing the petitioner for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , are hereby confirmed.

2) The petitioner is granted a period of three months’

time