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.

....2/-

- 2 -

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.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, March 27, 2009.