IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3516 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRA.194/2008 of I ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD ST.1874/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, PALAKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- S.BAIJU, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.SANTHAKUMAR, SANDHYA NIVAS,NEAR CHOTTANIKKARA TEMPLE, THATHAMANGALAM POST,CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.V.SHYLAJA SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------- 1. M/S.SREE GOKULAM CHIT AND FINANCE CO.(P) LTD., CORPORATE OFFICE,SREE GOKULAM TOWERS, NO:66 ARCOT ROAD,CHENNAI,REP.BY P.C.APPUKUTTAN, S/O.CHAMIAR,ASST.MANAGER,GOKULAM CHIT AND FINANCE CO.(P) LTD., PALAKKAD BRANCH OFFICE AT 12/1053-3, THERADAPUZHA BUILDING, R.S.ROAD, PALAKKAD. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, DISTRICT COURT,PALAKKAD. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAYAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.3516 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2009 ORDER The Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Palakkad in S.T.No.1874 of 2005 on his file convicted the revision petitioner for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year and to pay compensation of Rs.2,41,400/- to the first respondent who is the complainant. In Criminal Appeal No.194 of 2008 the conviction was confirmed. The sentence was reduced to a fine of Rs.2,43,000/- with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for two months. Out of the fine amount Rs.2,41,400/- was ordered to be paid to the first respondent in the event it is realized. 2. Assailing the legality, correctness and propriety of the above conviction and sentence as modified in the appeal, this revision petition was filed. 3. Today when the revision petition came up for admission, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner is not assailing the conviction and sentence. He sought eight months time for Crl.R.P.No.3516 of 2009 2 payment of fine. 4. In the above circumstance, this revision petition is dismissed as devoid of merit. The revision petitioner is granted six months time to pay the fine amount. Till then, the bail bond executed by him shall remain in force. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE Skj.