LawDistill
Supreme Court of India

P.G.SEBASTIAN vs STATE OF KERALA on 27 March, 2009

Cites 2 provisionsCites 0 judgmentsCited by 0
Crl.A. No.-000565-000566 - 2009Official PDFAdvocates R. SATHISH
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.565-566 OF 2009
(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos.3585-3586 of 2008)
P.G. Sebastian & Anr. ...Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Kerala ...Respondent(s)
O R D E R

Leave granted.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Appellant No.1 was convicted by the Trial Court under Section 138 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] and sentenced

him to pay fine of Rs.40,000/-; in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a

period of six months. The appeal preferred by the appellant No.1 was partly allowed

by Sessions Judge, Thrissur, who upheld the verdict of guilty and conviction of

appellant No.1 but set aside the sentence imposed on him and remanded the case to

the Trial Court to continue the proceedings and imposed an appropriate sentence and

an appropriate direction under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. coupled with an appropriate

default sentence.

Appellant No.1 challenged the judgment of Sessions Judge, Thrissur in

Criminal Revision Petition No.316 of 2000.

Although, the complainant did not challenge the appellate judgment, by an order

dated 26.9.2007 the High Court imposed substantive sentence of one week on

appellant No.1 and directed him to pay compensation of Rs.40,000/-. Thereafter,

appellant No.1 and complainant jointly filed a petition, which was registered as Crl.

M.C. No.695 of 2008 for permission to compound the offence by stating that

complainant has already received the amount of compensation. The same was

dismissed by the High Court vide order dated 22.2.2008.

Admittedly, neither the complainant filed revision challenging the order of

the Trial Court nor the High Court issued any rule for enhancement of sentence in

the revision petition filed by appellant No.1. This being the position, the High Court

was not justified in enhancing the sentence and directing the appellant to suffer

imprisonment for a period of one week.

Accordingly, the appeals are allowed, order dated 3.3.2000, passed by the

Sessions Judge, Thrissur in Criminal Appeal No.404 of 1999 and orders dated

26.9.2007 and 22.2.2008 passed by the High Court in Criminal Revision Petition No.

316 of 2000 and Criminal M.C. No. 695 of 2008, are set aside.

[G.S. SINGHVI] New Delhi, March 27, 2009.