IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 4563 of 2006(A) ------------------------------- CRA.731/2005 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, (ADHOC), ERNAKULAM CC.803/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, ALUVA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED: --------------------------------------- VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 57 YEARS, UNNIYELI AKATHODU HOUSE, EAST KADUNGALOOR, ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): STATE/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------- K.M. ABDUL HAMEED, S/O.MOHAMMED, KADUKKATTU HOUSE, NISHAL AUTOMOBILES, MASJID ROAD, ALUVA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN FOR R1 SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RAJESH THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: pm S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P No.4563 OF 2006 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of November 2011 ORDER The revision is by the accused convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, NI Act), concurrently by the two inferior courts. Sentence imposed against the accused, as modified by the learned Sessions Judge in appeal, is imprisonment till the rising of the court with direction to pay compensation of `.1,20,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for four months. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has preferred this revision. 2. Notice given, the 1st respondent/ complainant has entered appearance. 3. When the revision was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has no arguments on merits to assail the conviction and sentence, but, only a request to be made for grant of some time to pay the balance amount due on the compensation fixed. Petitioner has already deposited a sum of `.50,000/- towards part of the compensation, is the submission of the counsel. To pay the balance Crl. R.P No.4563 OF 2006 2 amount, `.70,000/-, which is outstanding, petitioner may be granted a short period, is the request of the counsel. In the light of the submissions made by the counsel as above, no dilation over the conviction imposed against him, concurrently by the two courts below, need be looked into. However, perusing the judgments, I find that conviction of the accused is supported by unimpeachable legal evidence. So far as the request made by the counsel for extension of time for paying the balance amount due as compensation, I find, the cheque involved in the case is dated 17-09-2001. Though the sum covered by that instrument is `.1,00,000/-, the compensation that was awarded by the learned Sessions Judge is `.1,20,000. Still, the timelag after the commencement of the prosecution would show that prima facie there is no merit in the request made for extension of further time. However, taking note of the submissions made by the counsel, I find, a short period as indicated hereunder can be provided to the accused for discharging the compensation as fixed by the court below. 5. Affirming the conviction and sentence, the accused is directed to appear before the magistrate on 19-12-2011 to serve out the imprisonment till the rising of the court, and to report payment Crl. R.P No.4563 OF 2006 3 of the compensation. Any sum already deposited by the petitioner towards the compensation shall be given credit to. The magistrate is directed to keep in abeyance the execution of 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 nonpayment of the compensation, the magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. Revision disposed of. Sd/- vdv S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge