IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3447 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRMP.892/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, ETTUMANUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ------------------------------- A.V.THOMAS, ANNADICKAL HOUSE, MOOZHIKULAGARA P.O.,NEENDOOR, ETTUMANOOR. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL SRI.DELEEP RAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. BENNY THOMAS, S/O. THOMAS, KANAKKARY THOTTATHIL THADATHIL HOUSE, VEMPALLY P.O., KURAVILANGAD. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RITHWIK PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.BABU KUMAR FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. -------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.Nos.3447 of 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of November, 2009 ORDER The question of law involved in this case is whether a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is entitled to count 30 days for a month mentioned in Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act in February also or when it covers February and March. The issue has been answered against the revision petitioner in Criminal R.P.2871 of 2009 by order dated 24/11/2009. In the above circumstance, the revision petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the revision petitioner to apply for condonation of delay, in case the cause survives and the revision petitioner has got sufficient reasons. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE skj