IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2009 / 15TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 3149 of 2007(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- N.A.SUBAIR, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, NADUVELIPARAMBIL, PALUPARASSERY, CHENGAMANAD P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, (RR) ALUVA. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NEDUMBASSERY VILLAGE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. DILIP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P(C) No. 3149 of 2007 ................................................. Dated this the 6th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an accused in 4 criminal cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Aluva convicted the petitioner. The petitioner filed 4 Criminal Revision Petitions namely Crl.R.P.Nos. 545 of 2005, 2634 of 2006, 2637 of 2006 and 2639 of 2006 against the judgments of the Magistrate. Although the conviction was upheld this court modified the punishment directing compensation to the complainant and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 45 days each. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Magistrate before 30.11.2006 to serve the modified sentence so imposed. Petitioner's grievance is that before that period was over, the Magistrate initiated proceedings against the surety of the petitioner for recovery of the surety amounts. Revenue Recovery Proceedings have been initiated as per Exts.P2 to P4 for recovering the same. The petitioner is challenging the said proceedings. W.P(C) No. 3149 of 2007 -2- 2. However, in the meanwhile the petitioner was forced to deposit and amount of Rs.30,000/- to avoid the coercive action under the Revenue Recovery Proceedings. Petitioner is now challenging Exts.P2 to P4 on the specific ground that the same was initiated prior to the date fixed by this court in Ext.P1 judgment. 3. I heard the learned Government Pleader also. 4. The petitioner now submits that subsequently he has paid the compensation amounts as directed by this Court. Therefore if that submission is correct, it is not proper to continue the Revenue Recovery Proceedings. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: If the petitioner has complied with Ext.P1 judgment of this court, further Revenue Recovery Proceedings shall be dropped. If the petitioner has deposited any amount with the Revenue Recovery authorities, that shall be refunded to the petitioner within one month. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs