KANAKAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is accused in C.C.No.37 of 1996 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankari. He was tried and convicted for offence punishable under Section 55(i) of the Abkari Act (for short, "the Act") and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and payment of fine of `.1,000/- with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. His appeal was dismissed. In revision this Court by order dated 18.09.2007 modified the sentence as imprisonment till rising of the court and payment of fine of `.5,000/- with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. PETITIONER was granted two months' time to remit fine in the trial court. He was directed to appear in the trial court on 26.11.2007 to receive the sentence. He however did not do so. On a later point of time he approached learned Magistrate willing to deposit the fine amount but that was not permitted by the trial court since the time specified by this Court by order dated 18.09.2007 had expired. Learned counsel relying on the decision of this Court in Girish v. Muthoot Capital Service (P) Ltd. (2007 (1) KLT 16) contended that it was open to the petitioner to deposit fine at any stage. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also.

(2.) IN this proceeding it is not necessary to consider correctness of the argument advanced by learned counsel that notwithstanding the time fixed by this Court to deposit fine it is open to the petitioner to deposit fine at any stage of the proceeding. Petitioner has expressed willingness to deposit fine within a week's time. What is required is to grant time till then. Resultantly this petition is disposed of in the following lines: