IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2008 / 4TH MAGHA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 145 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRA.137/2007 of SESSIONS COURT, KASARAGOD STC.875/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, HOSDRUG .................... REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- K.ABDUL KHADER, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. POKER ALI HAJI, SHAMINA MANZIL, BANGALAM, MADIKAI VILLAGE, BANGALAM P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SANTHOSHKUMAR RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE ------------------------------------------- 1. K.ANANDAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. AMBU, KOZHUMMAL HOUSE, CHAYYOTH, KINANUR VILLAGE, CHAYYATH P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.R.P.No.145 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of January, 2008 ORDER This revision petition is directed against a concurrent verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I Act. The cheque is for an amount of Rs.60,000/-. It bears the date 27.01.2005. The petitioner faces the sentence of imprisonment till rising of court and to pay the actual cheque amount of Rs.60,000/- as compensation and in default to undergo S.I for a period of three months. 2. Signature in the cheque is admitted. Notice of demand did not evoke any response. No defence evidence whatsoever was adduced. In the course of trial, an attempt was made to advance a contention that the cheque was a blank signed cheque handed over as security and was not issued for the due discharge of any legally enforcible debt/liability. 3. The courts below concurrently came to the conclusion that the complainant has succeeded in establishing all ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. Accordingly they proceeded to pass the impugned concurrent judgments. Crl.R.P.No.145 of 2008 2 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that he does not want to assail the verdict of guilty, conviction, sentence or the direction to pay compensation. He only prays that reasonable further time may be granted to the petitioner to raise and pay the amount and thus avoid the default sentence. 5. I find absolutely no merit, grace or substance in the said prayer. Leniency to the extent possible has already been shown to the petitioner. There is no merit in the petitioner's prayer for any long further period of time to raise and pay the amount and avoid the default sentence. I am however satisfied that the petitioner can be given a short breathing time till 29.02.08 to make such payment. 6. In the result, this revision petition is dismissed, but with the observation that the petitioner shall have time till 29.02.08 to raise and pay the amount and avoid the default sentence. The impugned sentence shall not be executed till that date. The petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall produce him before the learned Magistrate on 01.03.08 for execution of the sentence imposed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- Crl.R.P.No.145 of 2008 3