IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1830 of 2005() ------------------------------------ CRRP.35/2003 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, KALPETTA CC.21/2001 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KALPETTA .................... PETITIONER(S)/ RESPONDENT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------- K.SUDHAKARAN, DOOR NO.V/128, NEAR NEW SERVICE STATION, MADAKKIMALA P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S)/REVISION PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT & STATE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M.A.JAYAKUMARI, W/O.PADMAPRABHA, PALAKUNNU HOUSE, JAYAKUMARI ESTATE, MADAKKIMALA P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ V.K.MOHANAN, J. ------------------------------- Crl. R.P.No.1830 of 2005 ------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of November, 2010. O R D E R By filing a memo dated 19.9.2010, the counsel for the revision petitioner brought to the notice of this court that the revision petitioner expired on 13.10.2009 and further requested to pass appropriate order in the above matter. 2. The revision petition was filed challenging the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioner, who is an accused u/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Both the courts below found the revision petitioner guilty u/s.138 of NI Act and finally imposed a sentence of imprisonment till the rising of the court and also sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.42,000/- and in default directed him to undergo simple imprisonment for 1 month. It is also ordered that on realisation of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.40,000/- shall be paid to the complainant by way of compensation u/s.357(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. 3. Section 394 of Cr.P.C. mandate that, “Every appeal 2 Crl. R.P.No.1830 of 2005 under section 377 or section 378 shall finally abate on the death of the accused”. This Court in the decision reported in Viswanathan Vs. State of Kerala (2006(3) KLT 539) has held that, “Even after the death of the revision petitioner/ accused, the revision would survive and Court can pass appropriate orders with regard to sentence of fine.” In the light of the above decision and by virtue of S.394 of Cr.P.C. and on the basis of the submission made by the learned counsel, which is supported by the 'not pressed memo', this revision petition is dismissed confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the court below. It is made clear that as directed by the court below, if the fine amount of Rs.42,000/- is realised, a sum of Rs.40,000/- shall be released in favour of the complainant. The courts below is free to take steps to recover the fine amount by proceedings against the estate of the deceased accused. 3 Crl. R.P.No.1830 of 2005 This revision petition is dismissed as abated subject to the above observations and directions. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. ami/