IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2010 / 29TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3109 of 2010() ------------------------------ CRA.228/2008 of THE COURT OF ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-II, TRIVANDRUM ST.5/2007 of THE JUDL.FIRST CLASS MAGISTRTE COURT-X, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- BINDUKALA N.RAJAN,AYSWARYA, ARADHANA NAGAR, A.N.24, MARUTHOOR, VATTAPPARA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH P.NAIR RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. AJAYAKUMAR,VIAYIL VEEDU, PATHIRIPAPPALLI,KUDAPPANAKUNNU PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R2 BY P.P. SRI V. TEK CHAND. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl. R.P. No.3109 OF 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 21st Day of October, 2010 ORDER The challenge in this Crl.R.P is against the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioner who is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under section 138 of the NI Act. 2. The Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-X, Thiruvananthapuram, in S.T No.5/2007 sentenced her to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of Rs.1,05,000/- to the complainant under section 357(3) Cr.P.C. and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. In appeal, at the instance of the revision petitioner, the appellate court allowed the appeal only in part confirming the conviction but modifying the sentence whereby the substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to imprisonment till rising of the court and she is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- to the complainant under section 357(3) Cr.P.C. and the default sentence is fixed as simple imprisonment for six months. CRL.R.P. 3109/10 -:2:- 3. Heard the counsel for the revision petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner who is a lady has no contention on merit and she requires some time to pay the compensation amount. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in this case, I am of the view that the said submission can be considered positively. In the result, this Crl.R.P. is disposed of confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as recorded by the courts below. Accordingly, while confirming the sentence of imprisonment as modified and fixed by the appellate court and the direction to pay compensation, revision petitioner is granted 45 days time to pay the compensation amount, and it is made clear that the default sentence will attract only in case of default in paying the compensation amount within 45 days from today. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 6th December, 2010 instead of 15.10.2010 as fixed by the appellate court, to receive the sentence and to pay the compensation amount, and in case of any failure in appearing before the trial court on CRL.R.P. 3109/10 -:3:- the above date and paying the compensation amount, the trial court is directed to take coercive steps to execute the sentence and to secure her presence and to realize the amount. Coercive steps if any pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till 6th December, 2010. This Crl.R.P. is disposed of accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE. kvm/-