IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2011 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 197 of 2011() ----------------------------------- (S.T. 896/2006 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PATTAMBI, CRA. 374/2009 OF ADDL. SESSIONS COURT,PALAKKAD) .......... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------ V.A.PRINTO, S/O.ANTONY, VADAKKAN HOUSE, AYYANPARAMBU P.O.,AKATHIYUR, TALAPPILLY TLAUK,THRISSUR BY ADV. SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MANIKANDAN, S/O.ACHUTHAN NAIR, KURUPPATHU HOUSE,TRITHALA P.O., OTTAPALAM - 679 534. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEK CHAND THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 197 of 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of March, 2011 O R D E R The accused in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I.Act') approached this Court by preferring the above revision petition challenging his conviction and sentence, imposed as per judgments of the trial court as well as the lower appellate court. 2. As this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of conviction, learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that some breathing time may be granted to the revision petitioner to pay the fine amount. I find no reason to reject the above request. In the result, this Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I.Act as recorded by the courts below. Accordingly, while confirming the sentence of fine ordered by the appellate court and the fine amount, the revision petitioner is granted 45 (forty five) days Crl.R.PNO.197 of 2011 :-2-: time to pay the fine amount as ordered by the appellate court. It is made clear that the default sentence fixed by the appellate court will be attracted only if there is any failure on the part of the revision petitioner to deposit the fine amount within the above extended time. On realisation of the fine amount, the entire amount shall be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to deposit the fine amount fixed by the appellate court on or before 23rd April, 2011. In case of any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in making the deposit of fine amount on or before the above date, the trial court is free to take coercive steps to secure the presence of the revision petitioner and to execute the sentence. Coercive steps, if any, pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till 23rd April,2011. MBS/ V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. Crl.R.PNO.197 of 2011 :-3-: