IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1689 of 2011() ------------------------------------------ CRA.NO. 471/2005 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-1, KOLLAM CC.NO. 783/2003 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOTTARAKKARA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPLICANT ----------------------------------------------------- NOORJAHAN, AGED 40 YEARS, D/O. ALIYARKUNJU, NOORJAHAN MANZIL, MANIYANMUKKU MURI, ARKKANNOOR.P.O AYOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------------- 1. MOHANAN, S/O. KUNJUKRISHNAN, ANJUNILAYAM, VELAMKONAM CHERRI, CHINGELI, PULLIPPARA.P.O, KADAKKAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 536. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SABU SREEDHARAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P No.1689 OF 2011 -------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of July 2011 ORDER Conviction of the revision petitioner, concurrently by the two courts below, for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, NI Act) is assailed in this revision. At the time of admission, the learned counsel for the accused/revision petitioner submitted that extension of time for payment of compensation and thus avoiding of the default term of imprisonment alone is sought for as no sustainable ground can be urged to interfere with the finding of guilt founded by the two courts below in this case. 2. The revision filed with a delay petition was taken on file condoning the delay after giving notice to the 1st respondent/complainant. Though notice was served, he has not entered appearance. 3. The cheque amount involved, giving rise to the prosecution of the accused for the aforesaid offence and conviction, is only a sum of Rs.10,000/- . On finding him guilty and convicting him for the offence, he has been sentenced to Crl.R.P No.1689/2011 - 2 - undergo imprisonment for a day till the rising of the court and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- as compensation with default term of simple imprisonment for a period of one month. The sum involved is only Rs.20,000/-, fixed as compensation, and the complaint was filed as early in 2003, no doubt, deserve to be taken into consideration in examining the request made for extension of time for payment, to avoid the default term of imprisonment. Having regard to the submissions made by the counsel, the learned Magistrate is directed to keep in abeyance the execution of the warrant, if any, issued against the petitioner, for a period of three weeks to enable him to pay the compensation fixed within such time and thus avoid the default term of imprisonment. Irrespective of the extension of time granted for payment, he shall undergo the substantive term of imprisonment for one day, till rising of the court, for which he shall appear before the Magistrate on 01-08-2011. In default of appearance and also nonpayment of compensation, the Magistrate shall take steps to execute the sentence. Revision is disposed subject to the above directions. Sd/- vdv S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge