IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2009 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1931 CRL.REV.PET.NO. 1178 OF 2007() ---------------------------------------------- ST.2617/2005 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHITTUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------- MANOHARAN, S/O.MADHAVA MANNADIAR, ANCHAM MILE, KUTTIPPALLAM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ACCUSED AND STATE ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ARUCHAMY, AGED 48, S/O.CHAMI, THEMBARMADAYIL HOUSE, KUTTIPPALLAM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK. 2. STATE REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI P.R. JAYAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL. R.P. NO.1178 of 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 5th day of June, 2009 O R D E R -------------- Revision was admitted and notice was ordered to respondent No.1. He is served but remains absent. Heard counsel for petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. 2. This revision arises from the judgment of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittur in S.T. No.2617 of 2005 in a prosecution for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Learned magistrate found respondent No.1 guilty, convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment till rising of the court. He was directed to pay compensation of Rs.70,000/- and in default of payment, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. It was directed that if compensation is realised Rs.69,500/- shall be paid to the petitioner. Grievance of the petitioner is that the cheque was for Rs.1,50,000/- but compensation awarded is only Rs.70,000/- and even out of that, only Rs.69,500/- has been directed to be paid to the petitioner as compensation. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that respondent No.1 has preferred an appeal against the conviction and sentence and that appeal is pending in the Sessions Court, Palakkad as Crl.Appeal No.151 of 2007. Counsel requests that the CRL. R.P. No.1178 of 2007 -: 2 :- appeal may be withdrawn to this court to be heard along with this revision. 3. I am not inclined to withdraw the above appeal pending in the Court of Sessions since the proper forum to hear the appeal from conviction and sentence at the instance of respondent No.1/accused is the Sessions Court and its withdrawal might deprive respondent No.1 of an opportunity to challenge the judgment in the appeal in revision if at all the decision in the appeal went against him. In my view the proper course is to make over this revision to the Sessions Court, Palakkad for decision. 4. Hence this revision petition is made over to the Sessions Court, Palakkad for disposal along with Crl. Appeal No.151 of 2007 pending in that court. Learned Sessions Judge shall direct notice to be given to respondent No.1 or his counsel appearing in the criminal appeal as is found sufficient. Registry is directed to send Crl.Revision Petition No.1178 of 2007 to the Sessions Court, Palakkad forthwith. Petitioner shall appear in the Sessions Court, Palakkad on 30.6.2009. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv