IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/25TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 CRRP.No. 2981 of 2011 ( ) AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN CRA.187/2011 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT OF ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE, ERNAKULAM DT. 07.09.2011 IN ST.242/2008 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT-II, KOCHI DT. 28.03.2011 REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 V.M.VARGHESE, AGED 45 YEARS, VELUTHEDATH HOUSE V.A.T. ROAD END EDAKOCHI PALLURUTHY P.O KOCHI- 682 006. BY ADV.SRI.V.JOHN MANI RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE : ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 K.VIMALANANDAN, HOUSE NO. C.C 20/161, PARVATHY VILASAM DEEPAM JUNCTION PALLURUTHY P.O KOCHI- 682 006. 2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RAJESH THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-12-2011 ALONG WITH CRRP 2984 OF 2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JM S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P Nos.2981 OF 2011 & 2984 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December 2011 ORDER Both these revisions are filed by the same petitioner, who is the common accused in two complaint cases filed by the common 1st respondent, for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, 'NI Act'). Crl.R.P No.2981/2011 arise from S.T No.242/2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate -II Kochi. Crl.R.P No.2984/2011 arising from S.T No.241/2008 of the same court. 2. In S.T No.242/2008, on conviction of the accused, the magistrate sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay fine of `.11,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for three months more. In appeal against that conviction, numbered as Crl.Appeal No. 188/2011, the sessions judge modified the substantive term of imprisonment, reducing it to imprisonment till the rising of the court, but, enhanced the compensation amount to `.16,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for three months. Similarly, on conviction in S.T No.242/2008, the magistrate has sentenced the accused to undergo Crl.R.P Nos.2981/2011&2984/2011 2 simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of `.10,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for three months more. In the appeal preferred as Crl.Appeal 188/2011, which was jointly heard and disposed with the other Crl.Appeal, the sessions judge modified the sentence limiting it to imprisonment till the rising of the court with direction to pay compensation of `.15,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for three months. 3. When these revisions came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner 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 awarded in the two cases and, thus, avoid the default term of imprisonment. Petitioner/accused is an auto rickshaw driver, who is eaking out his livelihood from that vocation and unless a breathing time is granted he has no other go, but, to suffer the period of incarceration imposed as punishment, is the further submission of the counsel. 4. Going through the judgments rendered by the learned magistrate and also the sessions judge, it is seen, the two cheques involved in the cases, which gave rise to the prosecution and ultimately the conviction of the accused, were drawn and issued by the accused as early in 2007. When that be the case, prima facie, there is no merit in Crl.R.P Nos.2981/2011&2984/2011 3 the request made for further time to pay the compensation. However, taking into account the submissions made by the counsel, I find, a short period as indicated hereunder can be provided to the accused to pay the compensation and, thus, avoid his incarceration. 5. Affirming the conviction in both the cases, S.T No.241/2001 and 242/2008 and also the sentence imposed thereunder directing his imprisonment till the rising of the court, he is permitted to undergo that sentence concurrently. So far as the compensation in S.T No.241/2008, as modified by the sessions judge in Crl.Appeal No.188/2011, fixing a sum of `.16,000/-, and also the sum awarded as compensation in S.T No.242/2008, as modified in Crl.Appeal 187/2011 by the sessions judge fixing the sum at `.15,000/-, it shall remain intact, but, the default term of imprisonment provided in the two cases, which has been enhanced to three months imprisonment, shall stand reduced to simple imprisonment for one month in the respective case. No doubt, if payment is not made, the default term of imprisonment has to be undergone separately. 6. Petitioner is directed to appear before the magistrate on 16-02-2012 to serve out the imprisonment till the rising of the court and to report the payment of compensation fixed in the two cases as indicated above. The magistrate is directed to keep in abeyance the Crl.R.P Nos.2981/2011&2984/2011 4 execution of the sentence against the accused till the date fixed as above for his appearance. In default of his appearance and nonpayment of the compensation, the magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. Revision disposed of. Sd/- vdv S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge