Kerala High Court
C.R.Chandra Mohan vs The State Of Kerala Represented The on 22 May, 2008
Author: R.Basant
Bench: R.Basant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 1891 of 2008()
1. C.R.CHANDRA MOHAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED THE
... Respondent
2. A.RAMAKRISHNAN,JIJI MANDIRAM,
For Petitioner :SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :22/05/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
Crl.M.C.No.1891 of 2008
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of May 2008
O R D E R
The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He was found guilty, convicted and sentenced. Another Bench of this Court, in revision, modified the sentence. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of court. He was further directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as fine within a period of six months and in default to undergo S.I for a period of three months. The petitioner must have paid the fine amount by 30/04/2008. He did not make such payment. According to him, he had, on 8/5/2008, paid the said amount of Rs.2,00,000/- directly to the complainant. The revisional order by this court had directed that the entire fine amount, if deposited, shall be paid to the complainant under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C. As the petitioner could not raise the amount by 30/4/2008, the petitioner had paid the amount directly to the complainant and had obtained receipt on 8/5/2008, it is submitted. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is now Crl.M.C.No.1891/08 2 willing to surrender before the learned Magistrate and undergo the substantive sentence of imprisonment till rising of court; but he apprehends that if he so surrenders, the learned Magistrate may remand him to custody obliging him to undergo the default sentence. The petitioner has actually paid the entire amount to the complainant. The complainant is not now in a position to deposit the said amount of Rs.2,00,000/- before the learned Magistrate. If such deposits were insisted again, it would cause great hardship, inconvenience and loss to the petitioner. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the petitioner's action of paying amount directly to the complainant may be reckoned as sufficient compliance to the order passed in revision.
2. The course adopted by the petitioner is certainly not justified; but I am satisfied that if, however, the petitioner had actually paid the amount to the complainant and the complainant reports such payment to the learned Magistrate, the learned Magistrate can reckon the same as sufficient compliance of the direction to pay fine. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in the interests of justice, I am satisfied that such a direction to the learned Magistrate would be justified. Crl.M.C.No.1891/08 3
3. In the result, this petition is allowed in part. The petitioner can now appear before the learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen days. If he appears along with the complainant and satisfies the learned Magistrate that the entire amount of Rs.2,00,000/- has been paid to the complainant, the learned Magistrate shall reckon the same as sufficient compliance of the direction to pay fine and shall not insist that the said amount of Rs.2,00,000/- must be deposited again in court and thereafter only the said amount should be released to the complainant. This petition is allowed to the above extent.
Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner forthwith.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.1891/08 4 Crl.M.C.No.1891/08 5 R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007