IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3528 of 2008() ------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17/03/2004 IN CRMP. 309 /2004 IN CRA.133/2004 of SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR ST.380/1994 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER: PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------- P.V.KRISHNANKUTTY “KRISHNABHAVAN' PERUMBUL, NANNAMUKKU SOUTH CHANGARAMKULAM MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA RESPONDENT(S):RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. VIJAYA CHEMICAL NELLIKKUNNU, OLLUKKARA VILLAGE THRISSUR TALUK REP.BY MANAGER, THIMOTHY S/O.CHALISSERY PILOTH. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.RAFIQ FOR R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.KAMAPPU FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/10 /2008 , THE COURT ON 31/10/2008 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== Crl.R.P. NO.3528 OF 2008 =========================== Dated this the 31st day of October,2008 ORDER Revision petitioner is the accused and first respondent the complainant in S.T.380/1994 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur. Petitioner was convicted for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Petitioner did not file an appeal in time. Crl.Appeal 133/2004 was filed after a delay of more than six years with a petition to condone the delay. The Sessions Judge, Thrissur dismissed Crl.M.P.309/2004 the petition filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act and consequently dismissed Crl.A.133/2004. Revision petition is filed challenging the conviction and sentence. 2. Revision petitioner and first respondent jointly filed Crl.M.Appl.10884/2008, an application under section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for permission to compound the offence stating that CRRP 3528/2008 2 they have settled the dispute and first respondent has no further grievance against the revision petitioner. 3. In the ordinary course, when an appeal is filed with an application to condone the delay and that petition was dismissed and a consequently the appeal was dismissed and revision is filed and the revisional court finds that the petition to condone the delay should have been condoned, the proper course is to set aside the order dismissing the application filed to condone the delay and to remit the appeal to the appellate court for disposal. An offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is compoundable under section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act. When the first respondent complainant and the revision petitioner accused have settled the dispute and sought permission to compound the offence, interest of justice does not warrant a further ordeal of remitting the appeal to the appellate court to enable recording of the settlement and compounding of the offence when CRRP 3528/2008 3 permission to compound the offence can be granted by this court. Interest of justice will be met if the offence is allowed to be compounded as provided under section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Permission is granted. First respondent is permitted to compound the offence. Offence is compounded. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006