IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2807 of 2011() ------------------------------------ CRA.188/2005 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT-II, MAVELIKKARA CC.478/2000 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHENGANNUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------ RAJAN THOMAS, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. CHACKO THOMAS, THONDUKANDATHIL VEEDU, PAYYAPPADI.P.O, PUTHUPPALLY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.IYPE JOSEPH SRI.MANOJ KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JOHN T. ALEXANDER, THEKKETHURAYIL, PANDANAD WEST.P.O, PANDANADU, CHENGANNUR. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADVS. SMT.ELIZABETH MATHAI IDICULLA SRI.RACHEL JOSEPH SRI.MOHAN IDICULLA ABRAHAM SRI.MARTIN D.ALUMKARA R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SEENA RAMAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.2807 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2011 O R D E R Revision is by the accused, who has been convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 {for short ‘the Act’} concurrently by two courts below. Sentence imposed against the accused as affirmed by the Sessions Judge in appeal is simple imprisonment for two months with direction to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- as compensation to the complainant with default term of simple imprisonment for one month more. 2. The revision coming up for consideration today, in the presence of the 1st respondent/ complainant, the learned counsel for the petitioner/ accused submitted that he has no arguments on merits to assail the conviction, but only against the Crl.R.P.No.2807 of 2011 :: 2 :: sentence seeking modification of the substantive term of imprisonment, with a request to be be made for grant of three month's time to pay the compensation and thus, to avoid the default term of imprisonment. The learned counsel for the complainant has no objection in modifying the substantive term of imprisonment, but, strong exception against extending the time for payment as requested for. However, it is submitted that the 1st respondent/complainant does not stand in the way of this court granting reasonable time for payment of the compensation. 3. Considering the submissions made by the counsel as above, and taking note that the liability arising under a dishonoured cheque is primarily a civil liability, the substantive term of imprisonment imposed against the accused can be reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court, retaining Crl.R.P.No.2807 of 2011 :: 3 :: the compensation fixed with the default term of imprisonment. A short time, as indicated hereunder, can also be provided to the petitioner/accused to pay the compensation and thus avoid the default term of imprisonment. 4. Affirming the conviction, the sentence imposed against the accused is modified and reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court, retaining the compensation fixed with the default term of imprisonment. Petitioner/accused shall appear before the magistrate on 03.02.2012, to serve out the imprisonment till the rising of the court and to report the payment of compensation. The magistrate shall keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence till the date fixed as above for his appearance, to enable him to pay the compensation within such period. In default of his appearance and non-payment Crl.R.P.No.2807 of 2011 :: 4 :: of the compensation, the magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. Revision is disposed of as above. Sd/- (S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN) JUDGE sk/- //true copy// P.S. to Judge.