IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3424 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRA.623/2008 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (FAST TRACK)-II, ALAPPUZHA CC.326/2008 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------- SARADA, GOKULAM VEEDU, PAZHAYA THIRUMALA, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. MR. R.HARIKRISHNAN MR. N.ASOK KUMAR SMT. A.SINDHULEKSHMI SMT. R.REMA RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------------------- 1. E.T.JOSEPH, EERATHARA HOUSE, THOTTATHODU, THATHAMPALLY P.O., ALAPPUZHA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. JAYAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: kkms/ P.S. GOPINATHAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No. 3424 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of November, 2009 O R D E R 1. Revision petitioner was found guilty of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alappuzha, in C.C. No.326/2008, convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- to the 1st respondent under Section 357 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Aggrieved by the above conviction and sentence, Criminal Appeal No.623/2008 was filed before the Sessions Judge, Alappuzha. The learned Additional Sessions Judge to whom the appeal was made over confirmed the conviction and sentence and dismissed the appeal. 3. Assailing the legality, correctness and propriety of the above conviction and sentence as confirmed in appeal, this revision petition was filed. Crl.R.P.No. 3424 of 2009 2 4. Today, when the revision petition came up for hearing, learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner is only seeking three months time to pay the compensation. 5. In the above circumstance, the revision petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. The revision petitioner is granted three months time to pay the fine amount. Till then bail bond executed by the revision petitioner shall remain in force. P.S. GOPINATHAN, JUDGE shg/