IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2011 / 10TH BHADRA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1998 of 2011() ------------------------------ CRA.26/2010 of 3 rd ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-I), THODUPUZHA ST.155/2008 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THODUPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- SABU.C.K, S/O.KRISHNAN, CHALILVEEDU, MULLARINGADUKARA, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI (DIST). BY ADV. SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ---------------------------------- 1. NOBLE FINANCE COMPANY LTD., THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, SUDHEER KUMAR, PULICKAL VEEDU, KARIKODE VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI (DIST) 685 602. 2. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REKHA C. NAIR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- Crl.R.P.NO.1998 OF 2011 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of September, 2011 O R D E R Revision is by the accused, who has been convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, for short, the 'N.I.Act', concurrently, by the two inferior courts. The learned Magistrate, on his conviction, has sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.2,48,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for a further period of simple imprisonment for three months. In appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, affirmed the conviction, but modified and reduced the substantive term of imprisonment to one day, till the rising of the court, while retaining the compensation awarded with the default term as fixed by the learned Magistrate. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has preferred this revision. 2. When the revision came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the accused submitted that he has no Crl.R.P.No.1998/2011 2 argument on merit to assail the conviction and also the sentence as modified by the learned Sessions Judge, but only a request to be made for some more time to pay off the compensation awarded and, thus, avoid the default term of imprisonment. Cheque involved in the case is dated 07.10.2006. The dishonour of that instrument, on presentation, has led to the prosecution of the accused ultimately leading to his conviction. Having regard to the time lag after the drawing of the instrument and also the continuance of the prosecution, I find, prima facie, no merit in the request made for further period of time to pay the compensation awarded. However, taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsel pointing out the extenuating circumstances as to why the accused pleads for further time for payment, I find, some more time, as indicated hereunder, can be granted. 3. Confirming the conviction and sentence, the petitioner/accused is directed to appear before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thoudpuzha on 01.11.2011, to serve out the imprisonment for a day, till the rising of the court, and also Crl.R.P.No.1998/2011 3 to report the payment of compensation. Till the date fixed for the appearance of the accused, as above, the learned Magistrate is directed to keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence. In default of his appearance and non-payment of the compensation, the learned Magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. With the above directions, revision is disposed of. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp Crl.R.P.No.1998/2011 4