IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 8TH ASWINA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2279 of 2011(D) ------------------------------ CRA.557/2007 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT,-I, MAVELIKKARA ST.308/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, HARIPAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------- SOUNDARARAJAN, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, GENERATION DIVISION, MOOZHIYAR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.KRISHNA PILLAI SMT.S.ANJUSHA RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. K. GOPINATHAN, S/O MADHAVA PANICKER, PADMA BHAVAN, CHINGOLI P.O., HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT – 688001. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM- 682031 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SABU SREEDHARAN FOR R2 ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- Crl.R.P. NO. 2279 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th 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 NI Act) concurrently by the two courts below. Sentence imposed against the accused as confirmed by the Sessions Judge is simple imprisonment for four months and also payment of compensation of Rs.1,25,000/-, the cheque amount, with default term of simple imprisonment for a period of three months more. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has filed this revision. 2. The revision was filed with a petition to condone the delay on which notice was ordered to the respondent. After appearance of respondent and hearing the counsel on both sides delay was condoned. 3. When the revision was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submitted that he has no arguments on merits to assail the conviction but only as against the sentence, to seek modification of the substantive term of imprisonment, with a further request to be made for reasonable time to effect payment and thus avoid the default term of imprisonment. Having regard to the offence involved, I find Crl.R.P. NO. 2279 OF 2011 2 that the request made by the counsel for modification of the sentence deserves consideration. So far as the time requested for payment of compensation awarded, I find some more time can be granted as indicated hereunder. 4. Affirming the conviction, substantive term of imprisonment imposed is modified reducing it to imprisonment for a day, till the rising of court, retaining the compensation awarded with the default term of imprisonment. Petitioner shall appear before the Magistrate on 20.12.2011 to serve out the imprisonment for a day till the rising of court, and to report payment of compensation. The learned Magistrate shall keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence till the date fixed as above for his appearance, to enable him to make payment within such period. 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. Revision is disposed of. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE mns