IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2010 / 19TH JYAISTHA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 243 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRA.36/2004 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC) 1, KASARAGOD CC.53/2002 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KASARAGOD .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------------------- UMMER FAROOQU, C. NO.7058 , S/O.MUHAMMED KUNHI, CENTRAL PRISON, KANNUR. BY ADV. SMT.ASHA P.KURIAKOSE(STATE BRIEF) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI VENUGOPAL M.R. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.R.P. No. 243 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 9th Day of June, 2010 ORDER The learned Public Prosecutor, on instruction, submitted that the revision petitioner/accused had already undergone the period of sentence and as such this Crl.Revision Petition has become infructuous. Recording the above submission, this Crl.R.P is dismissed as infructuous. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- -:2:- The Apex Court in its recent decision in Damodar S.Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H (J.T.2010 (4) SC 457), has held that in a case of dishonour of cheques, compensatory aspect of the remedy should be given priority over the punitive aspect. If there is any default on the part of the revision petitioner in appearing before the trial court as directed above, the trial court is free to take coercive steps against the revision petitioner to procure the presence and to execute the sentence and for realisation of the amount. Execution of warrant if any pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till ...........2010. V.K.MOHANAN, J. O.P.No. -:3:- JUDGMENT Dated:..