IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH OCTOBER 2010 / 4TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3146 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- [Crl.A. NO.428/2007 OF ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA, ST.NO.153/2005 OF ADDL. MUNSIFF AND JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA] .................... REVISION PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------- BALAKRISHNAN,S/O.VADASSERY BALAN, PUTHUR DESOM, KAIPARAMBU VILLAGE,THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.T.N.MANOJ. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. VINAYAKA ENTERPRISES VADAKKUMURI DESOM, VARANTHARAPILLY VILLAGE, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, GOPI K.S, S/O.KALLUPALATHINGAL SANKU, THAIKKATTUSSERY DESOM, EDAKUNNI VILLAGE,THRISSUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SUMANGALA. P.N. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl. R.P. No.3146 OF 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 26th 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 Additional Munsiff and Judicial First Class Magistrate, Irinjalakuda, in S.T No.153/2005 sentenced the revision petitioner to undergo imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay a sum of Rs.1,09,000/-, the cheque amount, to the complainant as compensation under section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. and the default sentence is fixed as simple imprisonment for a period of two months. In appeal, at the instance of the revision petitioner, the appellate court dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and sentence 3. Heard the counsel for the revision petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner now submitted that the revision petitioner has no contention on merit and he 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 CRL.R.P.3146/10 :-2-: Negotiable Instruments Act as recorded by the courts below. Accordingly, while confirming the sentence of imprisonment and the direction to pay compensation, revision petitioner is granted three months time to pay the compensation amount, and the compensation amount is enhanced to Rs.1,41,700/-. It is made clear that the default sentence fixed by the court will be attracted only in case of default from the part of the petitioner in depositing the enhanced amount of compensation within the period extended by this court. It is also made clear that the petitioner is free to pay the compensation either directly to the complainant or by remitting the same in the trial court whichever subject to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 25th January, 2011 , to receive the sentence and to pay the compensation amount, and in case of any failure in appearing before the trial court on the above date and paying the compensation amount, the trial court is directed to take coercive steps to secure his presence and to realize the amount and thereby to execute the sentence. Coercive steps if any pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till 25th January 2011. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- in the appellate court in terms of the conditions stipulated by the appellate court while CRL.R.P.3146/10 :-3-: suspending the execution of the sentence and the same may be permitted to withdraw by the revision petitioner. If the revision petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- as submitted above and the said amount is retaining in the trial court, he is free to withdraw the same and in case of an application is filed in this regard, the same shall be allowed on satisfaction of the learned Magistrate that he had undergone imprisonment as imposed in this case and he had paid the compensation amount fixed by this Court. This Crl.R.P is disposed of accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE. kvm/-