IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2120 OF 2008() ------------------------------ ST.407/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOCHI .................... REVN. PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT: --------------------- G.K.SAREES, PROPRIETOR, SREEDEVI, K.P.K. TOWER, 2ND FLOOR, BROADWAY POST OFFICE, LINK ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI -31, REP BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY K.KESAVAN REDDY. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANILKUMAR SRI.P.BANI RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED & STATE: --------------- 1. SAJEEV @ SHAMSU, MAHARAJA SUPER MARKET, K.P.ROAD, PATHANAPURAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, KERALA PIN 685 695 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. NAZAR FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRRP2120/2008 OR DER ON CRL.M.A.11361OF 2008 IN CRRP 2120 OF 2008 DISMISSED 20.11.2008 SD/- M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. Okb/- /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P. NO. 2120 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of November, 2008 O R D E R Revision petitioner is the complainant in S.T.407 of 2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Kochi. Learned Magistrate convicted and sentenced first respondent/accused to simple imprisonment for four months in addition to a fine of Rs.10,000/- with a direction to pay out of the fine realised, Rs.5,000/- to the revision petitioner. Revision is filed challenging the insufficiency of the compensation contending that when the dishonoured cheque is for Rs.83,582/-, compensation should have been awarded for that amount. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. 3. Learned counsel submitted that first respondent has filed an appeal as Crl.Appeal 452 of 2008 before Sessions Court, Ernakulam and it is pending. 4. If an appeal is pending against conviction, it is not proper for this Court to interfere with the sentence at this stage. In that appeal if the learned Sessions Judge is modifying the sentence, petitioner is entitled to press for enhanced CRRP2120/08 2 compensation. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the sentence awarded by the Sessions Judge in the criminal appeal, he is entitled to challenge it by filing a revision. Revision is disposed accordingly. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Okb/-