Criminal Revision Petition No. 100 of 2005 · Kerala High Court · 2007

Crl.M.C.No.3267 of 20072revision composition, the accused may be compelled to undergo along period of substantive sentence in prison, this Court thought it fitto invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to accept thecomposition and to set aside the substantive sentence ofimprisonment. The facts in this case are entirely different. There isonly a substantive sentence of imprisonment till rising of court. Thereis only a direction `to pay the amount of compensation'. The learnedcounsel for the petitioner asserts and the learned counsel for therespondent does not dispute the fact that the entire amount ofcompensation has been paid.4.If the entire amount of compensation has been paid, therecan be no question of execution of the default sentence. This positionhas been made clear in Girish v. Muthoot Capital Service (P) Ltd.[2007(1) KLT 16)]. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that thecomposition need not be accepted. However, appropriate directionscan be issued to the court below.5.This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, allowed in part. The following directions are issued:i)The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrateon any working day at 11 a.m. If the petitioner so appears, he shallbe permitted to undergo the default sentence of imprisonment tillrising of court, if he has not so far undergone that sentence; Crl.M.C.No.3267 of 20073ii)The petitioner and the complainant can file an appropriateapplication before the learned Magistrate to confirm that the entirecompensation amount has been paid and discharged. If the learnedMagistrate is satisfied of that fact, the learned Magistrate shall notproceed to execute the default sentence. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for thepetitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE)rtr/- Crl.M.C.No.3267 of 20074