IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4464 of 2008() ------------------------- CRL.REVISION 3986 OF 2007 PETITIONER(S): 2ND ACCUSED -------------------------- PUSHPA SASI, ALAPPURATHU VEEDU, MAROOR MURI, ENADIMANGALAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. RAJENDRAN, S/O RAGHAVAN, PLAVELIL MANNIL MAROOR MURI, ENADIMANGALAM VILLAGE. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4464 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of November, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner has been found guilty, convicted and sentenced in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence have become final with the order dt.7.11.2007 in Crl.R.P.3986 of 2007. The petitioner faces the sentence of imprisonment till rising of court. There is also a sentence of fine of Rs.50,000/- which was directed to be paid within a period of five months and in default to undergo S.I. for a period of three months. The fine amount has not been paid within the period of five months. The petitioner is now willing to deposit the fine amount before the court below. But he submits that the court below is not accepting the said amount in as much as the amount has not been deposited within the period of five months. No orders of the Magistrate is produced. Crl.M.C.No. 4464 of 2008 2 2. The period of five months for payment was granted evidently to indicate that the default sentence shall not be executed till then. The period of five months is now over. Steps for execution of the default sentence can be taken. But if the petitioner deposits the fine amount at any time before the default sentence is executed against him or even after he is sent to prison to undergo the default sentence, the Magistrate is bound to accept the same and save the petitioner of the obligation to undergo the default sentence. The position has been made clear in the decision in Girish v. Muthoot Capital Services (P) Ltd. (2007 (1) KLT 16). I find absolutely no merit in this petition. The petitioner must appear before the Magistrate and undergo the substantive sentence of imprisonment. If he deposits the fine amount it shall be accepted by the learned Magistrate who shall not thereafter execute the default sentence. 3. This Crl..M.C. is dismissed with the above observations. 4. Hand over the order. (R. BASANT) Judge tm