IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/30TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 CRRP.No. 3023 of 2011 ( ) CRA.685/2010 of D.C & SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD ST.2914/2008 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, PALAKKAD ..... REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED IBRAHIM N.M., S/O.NOOR MUHAMMED, H.NO.25/262 NEW CIVIL NAGAR PALAKKAD. BY ADV.SRI.P.R.RAJA RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE 1. ABBAS, S/O.SIRAJUDHEEN, TAJ MANZIL, BANGALE STREET PUDUNAGARAM PALAKKAD - 678 503. 2. STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM - 682 031. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RAJESH THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-12-2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.3023 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2011 O R D E R Revision is by the accused in a cheque case. against his conviction concurrently rendered by the two courts below for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short “the Act”). Trial magistrate, on conviction, has sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a sum of Rs.1 lakh, the cheque amount, as compensation with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of dishonour of the instrument till the date of payment. In appeal, affirming the conviction, the Sessions Judge modified the sentence reducing the substantive term of imprisonment to one day till the rising of the court with direction to pay compensation of Rs.1 lakh to the complainant with the default term as fixed by the magistrate. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has preferred this revision. Crl.R.P.No.3023 of 2011 :: 2 :: 2. The revision coming up for consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submitted that he has no arguments on merits to assail the conviction and sentence, but only a request to be made for grant of three months' time to pay the compensation, and, thus avoid the default term of imprisonment. The further plea made is for clarification to be made that the compensation is only the cheque amount of Rs.1 lakh, since the order with respect to the same by the Sessions leads to some ambiguity. 3. So far as the sum fixed as compensation, it is seen, the magistrate has directed payment of interest at the rate of 8% per annum on such sum. The Sessions Judge, in his judgment, has not made any reference to the interest so ordered to be paid on the compensation. When that be so, and more particularly where the order of the Sessions Judge indicates that Crl.R.P.No.3023 of 2011 :: 3 :: what has been awarded as compensation is Rs.1 lakh, that alone, no further clarification is required. Compensation shall be restricted and limited to Rs.1 lakh only. 4. As regards the request for further time made by the counsel for payment of the compensation, having regard to the submissions made by the counsel, I find, a short period, as indicated hereunder, can be provided for payment. 5. Affirming the conviction and sentence and reducing the default term of simple imprisonment to a period of three months, petitioner/accused is directed to appear before the magistrate on 07.03.2012 to serve out the imprisonment till the rising of the court, and also report the payment of the compensation. Till the date fixed as above, the magistrate is directed to keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence, to enable him to pay the Crl.R.P.No.3023 of 2011 :: 4 :: compensation within such period. In default of his appearance and non-payment of the compensation, the magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. Revision is disposed of as indicated above. Sd/- (S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN) JUDGE sk/- //true copy// P.S. to Judge.