(1) Leave granted.

(2) The appellant challenged his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the High Court by filing a revision petition. He had laid challenge to the merits of the conviction, as also to the quantum of sentence. The High Court disposed of the revision by taking into consideration the legality and propriety of sentence only and did not at all advert to the legality of the conviction itself. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that such a summary disposal of the revision by the High Court was not justified and the High Court should have taken into consideration the merit of the challenge laid by the appellant on the legality and propriety of the conviction itself.

(3) For the foregoing reason the appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the High Court is set aside. The criminal revision shall stand restored on the file of the High Court and shall be heard and disposed of on merits consistently with the observations made hereinabove. Crl. A. No. 175 of 2002 @ SLP (Crl.) No. 1217 of 2001

(4) Leave granted.

(5) This appeal is filed by the complainant, disputing the correctness of the view taken by the High Court on the question of sentence. In the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant complainant, the decision of this Court in K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan has no applicability to the facts of this case. Inasmuch as the judgment of the High Court has been set aside in Criminal Appeal No. 174 of 2002 and the criminal revision has been remitted back for rehearing by the High Court, we

express no opinion on the plea raised by the complainant as it is available to be raised and considered by the High Court. (6) Both the appeals are disposed of accordingly.