IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2008 / 30TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3913 of 2008 --------------------------------- (CRA.579/2004 OF ADDL. SESSIONS COURT-I, MAVELIKKARA, CC.415/2002 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHENGANNUR. ............... PETITIONER/ APPELLANT/ ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------------ SONY THOMAS, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. P.T. THOMAS, THOMAS VILLA, THITTAMEL MURI, CHENGANNUR VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.MANOJ KUMAR. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT & STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MURUKESAN, THACHIRUPARAMBIL, THITTAMEL MURI, CHENGANNUR VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZER FOR R2, ADV. SRI.IYPE JOSEPH FOR R1. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3913 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of October 2008 O R D E R The petitioner has been found guilty, convicted and sentenced in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence have now become final with the order in Crl.R.P.No.3649/2005. The petitioner now faces a sentence of imprisonment till rising of court and to pay an amount of Rs.1.5 lakhs as compensation to the complainant. Default sentence of S.I for a period of two months was also prescribed. The petitioner was directed to appear before the learned Magistrate on or before 13/12/2006. 2. The petitioner has not appeared before the learned Magistrate so far. He has now come to this court with the prayer that the time prescribed for appearance may be extended. There is a further submission that the entire compensation amount has already been paid and in these circumstances there may be a direction that the default sentence should not be executed. 3. It is for the petitioner and the complainant to appear before the learned Magistrate and satisfy the learned Magistrate Crl.M.C.No.3913/08 2 that the entire compensation amount has been paid by the petitioner and received by the complainant. If the direction to pay the amount of compensation is already complied with and the learned Magistrate is satisfied about such compliance, I fail to understand the basis of the apprehension that the default sentence may be executed. Last trace of doubt on this aspect has been removed by the decision in Girish v. Muthoot Capital Service (P) Ltd. [2007(1) KLT 16]. Notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner has not entered appearance on or before 30/12/2006, the petitioner is not liable to undergo the default sentence, if, as a matter of fact, the compensation amount has already been paid and discharged. No further directions appear to be necessary. The petitioner must appear before the learned Magistrate and apprise the learned Magistrate of the facts and circumstances. If compensation amount has already been paid, he will liable only to undergo the substantive sentence of imprisonment till rising of court. 4. This Crl.M.C is in these circumstances dismissed with the above observations. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.3913/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.3913/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008