AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C. S. Dias, J
The revision petition is filed assailing the judgments in Crl.A No.671/2007 and S.T No.544/1998 passed by the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge -I, Thiruvananthapuram (Appellate Court) and the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram (Trial Court), respectively, holding the revision petitioners guilty, and convicting them for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'N.I.Act') and sentencing the second revision petitioner-Managing Director of the first revision petitioner company to simple imprisonment for one day ( till the rising of the court) and to pay a fine of Rs.1/- lakh and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of ten days.
When the revision petition came up for admission on 2.6.2011, this Court had suspended the execution of the sentence, subject to the condition that the second revision petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.45,000/- before the Trial Court.
Subsequently, when the revision petition came up for consideration on 5.9.2023, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the second revision petitioner is no more. He sought time to get instructions as to whether the near relatives of the second revision petitioner is desirous of prosecuting the revision petition.
Today, when the revision petition was taken up up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that they have not got any instructions.
In Pazhani v. State of Kerala [2017(1) KLT 341(FB)], a Full Bench of this Court has categorically declared that, if pending an appeal/revision petition, the appellant/ revision petitioner/accused dies and there is a sentence of fine imposed on the accused, then the near relatives of the deceased accused have a right to come on record and prosecute the appeal/revision petition. If no such application is filed, then the appeal/revision petition has to be confined to the record room
In the instant case, even though the submission was made that the second revision petitioner is no more and necessary steps would be taken to bring his near relatives on record, nothing has transpired till date. The revision petition is of the year 2011.
On a perusal of the impugned judgment passed by the Appellate Court, it is found that the sentence has been imposed on the second revision petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a day ( till the rising of the court) and to pay a fine of Rs.1/-lakh and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of ten days.
Following the law laid down in Pazhani and taking into account the fact that the second revision petitioner, who is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a day and to pay a fine of Rs.1/- lakh, and since none of his near relatives have come on record, I am of the definite view that the revision is confined to the record room.
Resultantly, the revision petition is confined to the record room.