IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 16639 of 2007(E) -------------------------- CC.688/2000 of C.J.M.,KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.SUNDARA, ADKATHBAIL, GUTHU ROAD, KASARGOD KASABA. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SMT.S.LAKSHMY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. LALITHA THOMAS, ALILA KUZHIYIL HOUSE, PULIKURUMBA POST, NADUVIL, KANNUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADDL.RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 IMPLEADED: 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGOD. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANNUR (ADDL.RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 5.6.2007 IN IA NO.7319/2007) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI C.M.KAMMAPPU FOR R2 TO R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No.16639 of 2007 E -------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT Heard counsel for petitioner and Public Prosecutor who took notice for respondents 2 to 4. 2. Petitioner successfully prosecuted first respondent in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasaragod for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate sentenced the first respondent to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and pay fine of Rs.1,55,000/-. First respondent preferred an appeal. Learned Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction but, modified the sentence as simple imprisonment for three months and directed first respondent to pay compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner. Grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 2 to 4 have not taken any steps to execute the non- bailable warrant issued against the first respondent from the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Petitioner therefore, prayed that direction may be issued to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to ensure that sentence imposed on first respondent is executed. WP(C) No.16639/2007 2 3. Counsel for petitioner submitted that in fact Ext.P3 petition was submitted before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to take necessary steps for execution of the sentence but, the petition was returned stating that all necessary steps will be taken. Learned counsel submitted that a direction may be issued to respondents 2 to 4 to apprehend first respondent within a specified time. I do not consider it proper or necessary to issue a time bound direction to respondents 2 to 4 to apprehend first respondent. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate will take necessary steps to ensure that the sentence imposed on first respondent is executed. Needless to say that in case any non- bailable warrant is issued from the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, respondents 2 to 4 or such other officer to whom it is addressed will take all necessary steps to execute the warrant. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is closed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks