IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2007 / 3RD SRAVANA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3415 of 2004(B) ------------------------------- CRA.16/2000 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT-II, MAVELIKKARA CC.339/1994 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MAVELIKKARA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------ 1. KUNJU KUNJU, AGED 68 YEARS, MULAKKAL VEEDU, MUDIYOORKONAM MURI, PANDALAM VILLAGE. 2. YESODHARAN, AGED 38 YEARS, MULAKKAL VEEDU, MUDIYOORKONAM MURI, PANDALAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.V.S.SALIM SRI.M.K.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SARALA, ERUVAMBALATHU VEEDU, VAZHUVADI MURI, THAZHAKKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.R.PADMAKUMAR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P. No. 3415 of 2004 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 18-10-2007 ORDER This is a petition filed by the accused/revision petitioner for a direction to the J.F.C.M., Mavelikkara to receive Rs. 10,000/- being the fine amount in compliance of the judgment in Crl.R.P. No. 3415 of 2004. The prayer in this petition is mischievously misconceived. The above revision was disposed of by this Court on 25-07-2007 granting the revision petitioner one month's time from that date to pay the fine of Rs. 10,000/-. He did not pay the said amount within the said period. An application filed by him as Crl.M.A. 9450 of 2007 seeking exemption from payment of fine was dismissed by this court. It is thereafter that the petitioner filed the present application. Apart from the fact that this petition has been filed on 10-10-2007 without any justification for the delay, if the prayer in this petition is granted, it will amount to reviewing the final order dated 25-7-2007 passed in Crl.r.P. 3415 of 2004. The decision cited in Mahendra Singh and others v. State of Bihar - (2002) 10 SCC 678 does not help the revision petitioner for seeking extension of time. I see no reason to entertain this petition which is accordingly dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) ani.