IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2011 / 9TH ASHADHA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3033 of 2010() ------------------------------ CRA.773/2008 of II ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD ST.2476/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, PALAKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- BASKARAN,S/O.CHAMI, AGED 50 YEARS, THACHAMCODE HOUSE,MUTTIKULANGARA, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.SATHISAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------- 1. PADMANABHAN,S/O.C.HANDRAN, ANAPPARA HOUSE,NOCHUPULLY, MUNDUR, PALAKKAD. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY P.P. SRI V. TEK CHAND. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No. 3033 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of June, 2011 O R D E R The accused in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I.Act') is the revision petitioner and the challenge in this Revision Petition is against the conviction and sentence, imposed as per judgments of the trial court as well as the lower appellate court. 2. Though the above Crl.R.P was filed by the accused as early as on 13.9.2010 and after taking adjournments continuously, now the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready to pay the fine amount for which the he requires three months time. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in this case, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted three months time to pay the fine amount. But is it relevant to note that the cheque in question is dated 23.7.2007 and that too for an amount of Rs.1,40,000/-. The trial court as well as the appellate court has concurrently found that the amount covered by the cheque in question is due to Crl.R.PNO.3033 of 2010 :-2-: the complainant. It is a fact that such a huge amount is with the revision petitioner though the same belongs to the complainant. If that be so, while granting time to pay the fine, the amount can be enhanced considering the fact that the amount is with the revision petitioner for the last 4 years, particularly, when the courts below did not award any sentence of imprisonment . In the result, this Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I.Act as well as the sentence of fine imposed against the him, but the fine amount is enhanced to the tune of Rs.1,68,000/- which he shall be paid within three months from today and in default, he is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Accordingly, the revision petitioner is directed to deposit the above enhanced fine amount on or before 30th September, 2011. In case of any failure on the part of the revision petitioner in making the deposit of fine amount on or before the above date, the trial court is free to take coercive steps to secure the presence of the revision petitioner and to execute Crl.R.PNO.3033 of 2010 :-3-: the sentence and for realisation of the fine amount. On realisation of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.1,65,000/- shall be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) (b) of Cr.P.C and the remaining amount of Rs.3000/- shall be deposited in the State Exchequer. Coercive steps, if any, pending against the revision petitioner shall be deferred till 30th September, 2011. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. kvm/-