BEFORE THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA

Cr.R.P No: 500/2027

Criminal revision petition filed against the judgement dated 21/07/2027 in criminal
appeal number 100/2025 On the file of sessions court, Palakkad and against the
judgement in C.C No: 200/2023 On the file of judicial first class Magistrate Court
Ottappalam.

Jacob S/o Frederick

Aged 35 years old Revision petitioner/
Rose Garden Appellant/ Accused
Palarivattom
Ernakulam

1)Rajesh S/o Rahul

Aged 30 years
Rahul Nivas
Lakkidi
Ottappalam Respondents/Respondent/
Complainant
2)The state of Kerala
Represented by Government Pleader
High Court of Kerala
Revision petition filed by the revision petitioner under section 397 and 401 of CRPC.

1) The revision petitioner was the accused in C.C No: 200/2023 On the file of
Judicial first class magistrate Ottapalam, Where in the petitioner was charge sheeted
for the offences punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act on a
private complaint filed by the respondent.
2) The trial court convicted this revision petitioner under section 138 of Negotiable
instruments act, and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three
months and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,10,000 and in default to pay the fine
to undergo imprisonment for three months and if the fine is realized rupees 1,00,000
would be return to the first respondent as compensation. Against the judgement, the
petitioner preferred a C.A No: 100/2025 On the file of principal sessions judge
Palakkad, and the sessions court by the judgement dated 31/07/2027 convicted the
petitioner and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and
also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,50,000 and in default to pay the fine undergo
simple imprisonment for one month under section 138 of Negotiable instruments
act.
3) Being aggrieved by the said order of conviction and sentence, the petitioner
above named best prefer this revision petition under section 397 And section 401 of
CrPC on the following among the other grounds.

Grounds for Revision

1) The order of the lower appellate court is opposed to law, facts and weight of
evidence adduced in the case.
2) The order of the trial court and the lower appellate court are incorrect, illegal
and irregular.
3) The appreciation of evidence of PW1 by the trial court and the lower appellate
court is wrong and against the principles of criminal law.
4) The defense evidence has been wrongly interpreted by the lower courts in
arriving at a conclusion.
5) The lower courts failed to appreciate the evidence regarding the issuance of
Exhibit P2 cheque.
 6) At any rate the sentence awarded is highly excessive.
Hence it is prayed, that this honourable court may be pleased to admit this
Criminal revision petition and call for records in C.A No: 100/2025 On the file of
the principal sessions court, Palakkad and further be pleased to set aside the order of
conviction and sentence passed against the revision petitioner and acquit him.
Dated this the 16th day of August 2027.
Counsel for the Revision Petitioner.