IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1932 CRL.MC.NO. 597 OF 2011() ------------------------ C.C.NO.370 OF 2009, CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KASARGOD .................... PETITIONER(S): REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DINESH KUMAR.K, AGED 40 YEARS, LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF KANNADA, GOVERNMENT COLLEGE, VIDYANAGAR P.O., KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON SMT.GOVINDU P.RENUKADEVI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. PRAVEENRAJ, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARA, HILL HOUSE, GANDI NAGAR, MANJESHWAR P.O., KASARAGOD, PIN-671 323. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.597 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 24th day of February, 2011 O R D E R Petitioner is accused in C.C. No.370 of 2008 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasargod. Case arose on a complaint filed by respondent No.1. Petitioner was convicted and sentenced. Appeal preferred by petitioner did not meet with the expected result. Petitioner filed Crl. R.P. No.2754 of 2010 in this Court. This Court as per order dated September 24, 2010 while refusing to interfere with the conviction, modified the sentence as fine of `.1,80,000/- to be deposited in the trial court within three months (from 24.09.2010) and in default of payment to undergo imprisonment for six months. It was also directed that if fine is realized `.1,75,000/- shall be paid to respondent No.1 as compensation under Section 357(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioner did not deposit the amount on time, was taken to custody and is undergoing imprisonment in the Central Prison, Kannur. It is the submission of learned counsel that petitioner paid `.1,75,000/- to respondent No.1 on 07.12.2010 and the latter has issued receipt. But that was not entertained by the CRL.M.C. No.597 of 2011 -: 2 :- learned Magistrate. 2. It is true that sentence being one of fine petitioner ought to have deposited the amount in the trial court and trail court was to disburse compensation out of the said amount. But if the amount has been paid directly to respondent No.1, petitioner cannot be left without any remedy. In such situation the direction contained in paragraph 5 of the decision in Beena v. Balakrishnan Nair (2010 [2] KLT 1017) can be applied. Resultantly, Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of in the following lines: (i) If respondent No.1 filed a statement through his counsel in the trial court acknowledging receipt of `.1,75,000/- by way of compensation learned Magistrate shall accept that as payment and make necessary entries in the Fine Register as directed in paragraph 5 of the decision referred supra. On such acceptance learned Magistrate shall order release of petitioner from the prison where he is detained. CRL.M.C. No.597 of 2011 -: 3 :- (ii) Petitioner shall within ten days of his release from Jail deposit `.5,000/- being the fine amount in the trial court failing which he shall undergo the remaining period of default sentence ordered by this Court in Crl. R.P. No.2754 of 2010. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv