IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2008 / 21ST POUSHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 119 of 2008() ------------------------ C./C. 57 OF 1993 BEFORE THE J.F.C.M., KODUNGALLUR PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- ABDUL RAHIMAN, S/O.ABDU, KOCHIKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOOLIMUTTAM DESOM, PAPPINIVATTOM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLOOR. BY ADV. SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. 2. DASAN, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, PONATH, EDAMUK DESOM, METHALA VILLAGE, KODUNGALLOOR. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.M.C. No. 119 of 2008 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 11-01-2008 ORDER The petitioner is the accused in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The cheque issued by the petitioner was on 17-4-1991. Since it was dishonoured and no payment was made by the petitioner even after the receipt of statutory notice the complainant prosecuted him before the J.F.C.M. Kodungallur in C.C. No. 57 of 1993. After a protracted trial, the petitioner was finally convicted on 17-5-1995. He was sentenced to imprisonment for two months and to pay compensation of Rs. 13,945/- under Sec. 357(3) Cr.P.C. to the complainant within one month of 17-5- 1995. The conviction and sentence were confirmed in an appeal filed as Crl. A. No. 140 of 1995 before Addl. Sessions Court, Thrissur. The petitioner challenged the concurrent orders of the courts below by filing Crl.R.P.849 of 1997. This court did not interfere with the direction for compensation but reduced the sentence to imprisonment till the rising of the court. It was directed that if the petitioner had already deposited the compensation he shall appear before the court to receive the imprisonment till the rising of the court. The petitioner has neither deposited the compensation nor has he appeared before the trial court for receiving the sentence of imprisonment till the rising of the court. Since the petitioner Crl.M.C. No. 119 of 2008 -:2:- failed to appear before the Magistrate on issue of summons, non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against him and warrant was repeated. His present contention that he had already undergone imprisonment for two months prior to the Revision before this Court cannot be countenanced at all since he had no such contention before this court while Crl.R.P. was disposed of. His further contention based on 1998 (2) KLT 14 that non-bailable warrant cannot be issued for realisation of the fine amount, ignores the fact that he did not appear before the magistrate to receive the sentence of imprisonment till the rising of the Court as directed. The learned Magistrate was fully justified in issuing non-bailable warrant of arrest to secure his presence before court . The issue of distress warrant against the petitioner was also fully justified due to the non-payment of compensation which is to be realised as if it were fine. If the petitioner does not remit the entire compensation amount within two weeks from today, the process issued against him shall be continued and I see absolutely no illegality in the proceedings issued by the Magistrate. This Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above. V.Ramkumar, Judge ani Crl.M.C. No. 119 of 2008 -:3:-