Sanuraj A.R. v. Mathrubhoomi Printing & Publishing Company Ltd. & State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** **MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014/7TH MAGHA, 1935** **Crl.MC.No. 4907 of 2013 () ---------------------------** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN Crl.Rev.Pet 2828/2011 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 02-12-2011** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ST 1596/2007 of J.M.F.C.-I,KOZHIKODE** **PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------** **SANURAJ A.R, S/O.RAMADAS, ALLURE HOUSE, BHOOTHANA COLONY P.O. PULPALLY, WAYANAD.** **BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE:** **----------------------------------** **1. MATHRUBHOOMI PRINTING & PUBLISHING COMPANY LTD. HAVING ITS OFFICE AT M.J.KRISHNA MOHAN MEMORIAL BUILDING K.P.KESAVA MENON ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673001, REPRESENTED BY K.SREENIVASAN, S/O.V.KAILASAM, DEPUTY MARKETING MANAGER, CIRCULATION.** **2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.B.GANGESH R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE P.** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Crl.MC.No. 4907 of 2013 () ---------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:** **-----------------------** **ANNEXURE-A: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.12.2011 IN CRL.R.P.NO.2828/2011 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.** **ANNEXURE-B: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 03.05.2012.** **ANNEXURE-C: TRUE COPY OF THE AGENCY LEDGER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.** **RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL** **-----------------------** **/TRUE COPY/** **P.S. TO JUDGE** **cl** ## **K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.** ................................................. Crl.M.C.No.4907 of 2013 .................................................. Dated this the 27[th] day of January, 2014. ## **O R D E R** This application was filed by the accused in S.T.No.1596/2007 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Kozhikod, to give a direction to the Magistrate to record payment of fine directly paid to the first respondent and permit to serve the sentence of imprisonment till the rising of court alone under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). 2. The case of the petitioner was that the first respondent/complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the petitioner before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kozhikode, which was taken on file as S.T.No.1596/2007 by that court. Later, after trial, the petitioner was convicted and the appeal filed by him before the sessions court was also disposed of by confirming the order of conviction, but modifying the sentence to imprisonment for 15 days and also to pay a fine of Rs.23,690/-, in default to undergo simple Crl.M.C.No.4907 of 2013 2 imprisonment for two months. It is further ordered that, if the fine amount is realised, the same to be paid to the complainant, who is the second respondent herein, under Section 357(1)(b) of the Code. 3. Dissatisfied with the same, the petitioner filed a revision as Cr.R.P.No.2828/2011 before this Court and that was disposed of by this Court vide Annexure-A order confirming the order of conviction passed by the court below and during the admission stage itself, but modifying the sentence as follows: “Affirming the conviction, sentence imposed against the accused is reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court, retaining the compensation fixed with the default term of imprisonment, but reduced to simple imprisonment for 15 days. Accused is directed to appear before the magistrate on 30.1.2012, to serve out the imprisonment till the rising of the court and to report the payment of compensation. The magistrate shall keep in abeyance the execution of the sentence till the date fixed as above for his appearance, to enable him to pay the compensation within such period. In default of his appearance and non-payment of the compensation, the magistrate shall execute the sentence taking appropriate steps in accordance with law.” 4. The revision petitioner has paid the compensation directly to the first respondent and when he surrendered before Crl.M.C.No.4907 of 2013 3 the court below to receive the sentence, the Magistrate did not allow the same on the ground that the fine has to be paid in that court and that court alone can pay the compensation out of fine to the complainant. So the petitioner has come before this Court with the following relief. “For these and other grounds to be urged at the time of hearing, this Honourable Court may kindly issue a direction to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kozhikode to make necessary entries in the fine register that amount of fine ordered in Annexure A judgment is realised and paid to the 1[st] respondent in the light of the judgment in Beena v. Balakrishnan Nair (2010 (2) KLT 1017) and allow the petitioner to undergo the imprisonment till rising of court as ordered in Annexure A judgment”. 5. Heard the counsel for the petitioner, first respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor. 6. The counsel for the first respondent submitted that the first respondent had received the amount directed to be paid as compensation out of fine imposed directly from the petitioner. It is true that in case where fine is ordered, the accused has to remit the fine before court and that has to be entered in the fine register and thereafter that can be disbursed to the complainant as compensation in compliance with the orders Crl.M.C.No.4907 of 2013 4 passed. But, in this case, though the order of fine is seen to have been confirmed by this Court by reading the operative portion of the judgment, it will be seen that time has been granted to the petitioner to pay the amount ordered as compensation and report that matter to the concerned Magistrate. So it is on the basis of that direction that the petitioner had paid the amount directly to the first respondent in stead of remitting the same before the trial court. Similar question has arisen before this Court in **Beena v. Balakrishnan Nair** (2010 (2) KLT 1017) where this Court has disposed of the case as follows: “That however, cannot be the end of the matter so far as grievance of petitioners is concerned. According to the petitioners, they have already paid amount payable to respondent No.1. That is revealed from petitions filed by them in this Court. True, by the final orders disposing of Revision Petitions this Court while modifying the sentence as simple imprisonment till rising of the court sentenced petitioners to payment of fine which is to be deposited in the court concerned and directed that fine if realised will be paid to respondent No.1 under S.357(1) (b) of the Code. The proper procedure for petitioners was to deposit fine in the court concerned so that such court would pay the said amount to respondent No.1 as provided under S.357(1)(b) of the Code after making necessary entries in the fine register of that court. Now that petitioners have paid the amount to respondent No.1 to their satisfaction, what is required is only to make necessary entries in the 5 Crl.M.C.No.4907 of 2013 fine register that amount of fine is realised and paid to respondent No.1. In the particular facts and circumstances of these cases, I direct the learned Magistrate that if respondent No.1 filed a statement within one month from this day in the court concerned through his counsel in that court acknowledging receipt of amount of fine ordered to be paid as per final order disposing of the revision petitions, learned Magistrate will accept that as sufficient compliance of direction contained in the orders disposing of the Revision Petitions and make necessary entries in the fine register as if fine is realised and paid to respondent No.1 and close the matter accordingly. The warrant of arrest if any issued against petitioners will stand in abeyance during the said period of one month or statement is filed in the court concerned and necessary entry in the fine register is made, whichever is earlier”. 7. So, I feel that the same direction may be given in this case also. So, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned Magistrate to make an entry regarding the payment of fine directly to the complainant as compensation to be payable out of fine and then allow the revision petitioner to serve sentence till the rising of the court as directed by this Court, if the first respondent files a statement to that effect before that court on or before 10.2.2014. He is directed to appear before the concerned Magistrate court on 10.2.2014. Till then the learned Magistrate is directed to keep execution Crl.M.C.No.4907 of 2013 6 of the sentence in abeyance. Office is directed to communicate this order to the court below immediately. With the above direction and observation, the Crl.M.C is disposed of. Sd/- ## **K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.** cl