IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2009 / 11TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 12294 of 2009(Q) -------------------------- ST.691/2009 of C.J.M.,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- YAMUNA ROLLER FLOUR MILLS (P) LTD., MILLS AND REGISTERED OFFICE, 22 A DEVELOPMENT PLOT, P.O. PERINGANDOOR, THRISSUR 680 581, REPRESENTED BY ITS ACCOUNT OFFICER, VELAPPAN. BY ADV. MR.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SRI. SANOFAR A, M/S HIGH LIGHT FOOD PRODUCTS, CKP MARKET, CKP JUNCTION, ANCHALUMOODU, KOLLAM 691 601. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. GIKKU JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.C.NO.12294 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 1st June 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the complainant company in S.T.691/2009 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur. Second respondent is the accused. Complaint was filed by petitioner company alleging that second respondent committed an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Chief Judicial Magistrate on 16/3/2009 took cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and invoking the power under Section 192 of Code of Criminal Procedure made over the case to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kodungallur. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to quash the direction to make over the case to Kodungallur, contending that grievance of the petitioner was not considered while directing the transfer. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. 3. Learned counsel pointed out that petitioner WPC 12294/09 2 company is registered at Thrissur and second respondent accused is in Kollam and if case is to be tried at Kodungallur petitioner company has to execute a power of attorney and also to engage another counsel and that could be avoided, if the case is tried at Thrissur itself. Petitioner sought a direction to consider the grievance of the petitioner. 4. Section 192 of Code of Criminal Procedure enables Chief Judicial Magistrate after taking cognizance to make over the case to the file of another competent Magistrate. But while making over the case from Thrissur to Kodungallur, Chief Judicial Magistrate did not consider the difficulty to be faced by the petitioner. If it is for the convenience of the parties, it could have been appreciated. Accused is at Kollam. Complainant is at Thrissur. Grievance of the petitioner is that if the case is to be tried at Kodungallur, petitioner company may have to execute another power of attorney and also appoint another counsel and it could be avoided, if the case is tried at Thrissur. As Chief Judicial Magistrate does not consider this aspect while making over the case to Thrissur, Ext.P2 order to the extent of making over WPC 12294/09 3 the case to Chief Judicial Magistrate court, Kodungallur is quashed. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur is directed to consider whether the case could be tried by him or could be made over to any of the Magistrate's court at Thrissur after hearing the complainant. Writ petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.