IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2011 / 8TH MAGHA 1932 CRL.MC.NO. 282 OF 2011() -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMP.2788/2010 IN CRA.289/2010 OF SESSIONS COURT, (WAYANAD) KALPETTA .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- P.K.MADHUSOODANAN,S/O.PRABHAKARAN, KALABHAM,PARLIKOLLAYKKAL HOUSE, ODANNOOR, PARALI P.O,PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.SAJU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. MOIDEEN C,S/O.KOYAMUTTY MESTHIRI, CHEROOR HOUSE, KALPETTA P.O,WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No. 282 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 28th day of January, 2011 O R D E R This petition is filed by the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.289 of 2010 of the court of learned Sessions Judge, Wayanad challenging order dated December 30, 2010 on Crl.M.P. No.2788 of 2010. Petitioner is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and payment compensation of `.6,00,000/- with a default sentence. In the appeal petitioner wanted the sentence and direction for payment of compensation to be stayed. Learned Sessions Judge while suspending the execution of sentence in Crl. M.P. No.2788 of 2010 directed petitioner to deposit Rs.50,000/- towards compensation within one month from that date. Direction for deposit of compensation is under challenge. It is contended that there is no power conferred on the appellate court to impose any such direction. 2. That contention apparently cannot stand in the light of the decision in Suhra Kunhimon v. Harif (1999 (1) KLT CRL.M.C. No.282 of 2011 -: 2 :- 463). Hence the learned Sessions Judge is justified in imposing condition while suspending the sentence. Having regard to the fact that amount of compensation awarded is `.Rs.6,00,000/- I am not inclined to think that direction for deposit of Rs.50,000/- is illegal. 3. What remained is the request of learned counsel to grant sufficient time to deposit the amount. Learned counsel requested that petitioner may be granted two months’ further time. The Impugned order was passed on December 30, 2010. Petitioner has not deposited the amount within the period of one month as directed by the learned Sessions Judge. However having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case I am inclined to grant petitioner one month’s time from this day to deposit the amount as directed by the learned Sessions Judge. Resultantly, Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of granting petitioner one month’s time from this day to deposit the amount as directed by the learned Sessions Judge on Crl. M.P. No.2788 of 2010 in Crl. Appeal No.289 of 2010. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv