IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 345 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRA.633/2002 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-III, THALASSERY CC.31/2001 of CHIEF JUDITIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THALASSERY REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED ---------------------------------------------------------------------- K. MUHAMMED, S/O.C.H.MOIDEEN HAJI MUHARAS, CHEMBILODE AMSOM, MOWENCHERRY P.O. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, S/O.KUNHAPPA NAIR (RTD. SENIOR PERSONNEL OFFICER INDIAN OIL CORPORATION), MOKERI AMSOM KADEPURAM DESOM (DIED)-(LEGAL HEIRS NOT IMPLEADED IN THE COURT BELOW). 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.R.P.No.345 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 28th day of February, 2008 ORDER The revision petitioner is the accused in C.C.No. 31 of 2001 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery, which was a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. He was convicted by the trial court and he preferred Crl.Appeal No.633 of 2002 before the Sessions Court, Thalassery. Pending the appeal the respondent/ complainant, Padmanabhan Nair died and a petition was filed by his wife as C.M.P.No.1863 of 2006 to implead the legal representatives of the said Padmanabhan Nair. But without passing any orders therein, the learned Additional Sessions Judge( Adhoc-III), Thalassery disposed of the appeal confirming the conviction entered but modifying the sentence. 2. This Court had called for a report from the lower appellate court as to whether the respondent,complainant in the appeal had died and whether C.M.P.No.1863 of 2006 filed by his widow was disposed of before the appeal itself was disposed of. As per the letter dated 21.2.08, the lower appellate court has Crl.R.P.No. 345 of 2008 2 reported that the appeal was disposed of without noticing the death of the 1st respondent/ complainant and without noticing the pendency of C.M.P.No.1863 of 2006. If so, the judgment under revision passed against a dead person cannot be sustained. Hence, the judgment of the lower appellate court is accordingly set aside and the matter is remanded to the lower appellate court for disposing of the appeal afresh after passing orders on C.M.P.No.1863 of 2006 filed in the said appeal. 3. The petitioner shall appear before the lower appellate court without further notice on 24.3.08. This Crl.R.P is disposed of as above. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj