IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1931 CRL.A.No. 260 of 2003() ------------------------------ CC.481/2000 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, MUVATTUPUZHA ................................... APPELLANT(S): COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------- SHRI T.M.BASHEER, THAZHATHOTTATHIL VEEDU, EAST MARDI KARA, MARADI VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): ACCUSED & STATE: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. P.K.KHALID, PULLANTHIKATTIL VEEDU, IRINGAVOOR P.O., THIRUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.MADHU N.NAMBOOTHIRIPAD R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MR.C.M.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Sou. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, J ---------------------------- Crl. Appeal. No.260 of 2003 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Appellant is the complainant in C.C. No.481/2000 of Judicial I Class Magistrate Court I, Muvattupuzha. He has filed a complaint under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act against the accused before the trial court. On December12, 2002 when the case was called, the complainant was absent. Therefore the lower court dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused under section 256 (1) Cr.P.C. The complainant has come up in appeal challenging the said order of the learned Magistrate. 2. Special leave was granted on 21.1.2003 as per the order in Crl.M.C.618/2003. 3. Heard the counsel for the appellant. There is no appearance for the first respondent/accused. 4. It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that warrant was pending against the accused in the case and he never appeared before the trial court, By an inadvertent mistake CRA.260/03 2 the posting date was mistakenly noted as December 13, 2002 instead of December 12, 2002 and that therefore complainant was absent on December 12, 2002. 5. The explanation offered by the petitioner appears convincing. Therefore I set aside the order of the trial court dated December 12, 2002, dismissing the complaint and acquitting the accused. The trial court is directed to restore the complaint on file and proceed in accordance with law. This being a case of 2000, the trial court is directed to dispose of the matter as early as possible, but not later than 6 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. In the result, appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the trial court dismissing the complaint and acquitting the accused is set aside. The trial court is directed to restore CC.481/2000 on file and dispose the same in accordance with law. The appellant shall appear before the trial court on or before 15.12.2009. (P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE) sou. CRA.260/03 3 P.Q. BARKATH ALI,J Crl. Appeal No.260 of 2003 JUDGMENT 20.11.2009