IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3507 of 2007() ------------------------------------------ CRA.498/2006 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, (ADHOC-I), ERNAKULAM CC.2342/1993 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOCHI .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------------ A.MOHAMMED KOYA, AGED 44, S/O.BAPPU HAJI @ MUNIYAN, NEDUVA AMSOM DESOM, THIRURANGADI TALUK,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.K.J.THOMAS STANLEY SRI.V.J.CHANDY RESPONDENT(S):RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT & STATE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THAMPI & COMPANY, IRUMPANAM, THRIPPUNITHURA,REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR.V.N.JAMES, NJARAKKATTIL HOUSE,MULANTHURUTHY P.O.PERUMPILLY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW K.VARGHESE R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEK CHAND THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 3507 of 2007 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2011 O R D E R The challenge in this Crl.R.P. is against the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. 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 compensation amount fixed by the court below and also for receiving the sentence. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the said submission requires positive consideration and the petitioner can be granted thirty days time. 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 Crl.R.PNO.3507 of 2007 :-2-: below. Accordingly, while confirming the sentence of imprisonment, the direction for payment of compensation, the compensation amount and default sentence ordered by the appellate court, the petitioner is granted one month's time to pay the compensation amount ordered by the courts below to the complainant under Section 357(3) of the Cr.P.C. and 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 pay the compensation amount within one month's time from today. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court to receive the sentence of imprisonment fixed by the appellate court and to pay the compensation amount as ordered against him on 23rd March,2011. In case of any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in appearing before the trial court to receive the sentence and to pay the compensation amount on the above date, the trial court is free to take coercive steps to secure the presence of the revision petitioner and to execute Crl.R.PNO.3507 of 2007 :-3-: the sentence. Coercive steps, if any, pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till 23rd March,2011. MBS/ V.K.MOHANAN, Judge.