IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3094 of 2010() --------------------------------------------- CRA.461/2006 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA ST.395/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------------------------ SHYLA RAPHY, D/O.V.C.BUNGALOW SALAVUDHIN, THELIKKOD VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.HARIKUMAR SMT.MOLLY KOSHY RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ANITHA RAMAKRISHNAN, W/O.CHERKKARA VEETTIL RAMAKRISHNAN, NANDHIKKARA DESOM, PARAPPUKKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SEENA.R THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P No.3094 OF 2010 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of November 2011 ORDER The revision is by the accused who has been convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, NI Act), concurrently by the two courts below. Sentence imposed against the accused, as modified by the learned sessions Judge in appeal, is imprisonment till the rising of the court with direction to pay a sum of `.2,25,000/- as as compensation and `.2,000/- as cost to the complainant, with default term of simple imprisonment for one month and 15 days respectively. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has filed this revision. 2. Notice given, the 1st respondent/complainant has entered appearance. I heard the counsel on both sides. The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused reiterated the challenges canvassed before the court below to assail the conviction rendered against her. Defence canvassed in the case was that the cheque had been obtained from the accused by coercion. No material in support of the defence canvassed for was tendered, and both the courts, after meticulous consideration of the evidence let in and analysing the proved facts of the case, have found the defence raised by the accused unworthy of any merit. I do not find any merit in the challenge canvassed to Crl. R.P No.3094 OF 2010 2 dispute the finding on fact concurrently rendered by the court below holding the accused guilty of the offence to found the conviction against her. 3. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner requested for grant of some time to pay the compensation and costs awarded by the court below to avoid the default term of imprisonment. It is submitted that the interim orders passed by the court directing deposit of a portion of the compensation within the time limit fixed has already been complied with. Having regard to the submissions made by the counsel, I find, a short period, as indicated hereunder, can be granted to the accused. 4. Affirming the conviction and sentence, petitioner/accused is directed to appear before the magistrate on 16-01-2012 to serve out the imprisonment till the rising of the court, and to report payment of the compensation and cost. If any amount has been paid by the accused towards the compensation fixed, it shall be given credit to. Magistrate shall keep in abeyance the execution of sentence till the date fixed as above for her appearance. In default of her appearance and nonpayment of the compensation, the magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law. Revision disposed of. vdv S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE