IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2008 / 13TH POUSHA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 4 of 2008() --------------------------- CRA.117/2006 of SESSIONS COURT, KASARAGOD STC.3073/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, HOSDRUG .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- P.M.MOOSA HAJI, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.AYSHA UMMA, MEYILAKINIHATH HOUSE, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SMT.T.SUDHAMANI RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE -------------------------------------------- 1. SANKARAN NAMBOODIRI, S/O.VISHNU NAMBOOTHIRI, RESIDING AT PALAKAT, PEROLE VILLAGE, NILESHWAR P.O. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No. 4 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2008 O R D E R This revision petition is directed against a concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The petitioner now faces a sentence of imprisonment till rising of Court (as modified by the appellate court) and to pay the actual cheque amount of Rs. 1,10,000/- as compensation under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. There is a default sentence of S.I. for a period of one month. 2. Signature in the cheque is admitted. Notice of demand was returned unclaimed. No defence evidence was adduced also. 3. Called upon to explain the nature of challenge which the petitioner wants to mount against the impugned concurrent judgments, the learned counsel for the petitioner does not strain to assail the verdict of guilty and conviction on merits. The learned counsel only prays that a reasonable further time may be Crl.R.P.No. 4 of 2008 2 granted to the petitioner so that the petitioner can raise the amount, pay the same and avoid the default sentence. 4. I have gone through the impugned judgment. I am satisfied that the stand taken by the learned counsel is absolutely justified. The verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence are absolutely sustainable and there is no valid reason to interfere with the same. 5. This revision petition is accordingly dismissed, but with the observation that the impugned sentence against the petitioner shall not be executed till 29.2.2008. On or before 1.3.2008 the petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate to serve the sentence. (R. BASANT) Judge tm