IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2008 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1705 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.110/2000 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, THALASSERY .................... PETITIONER: ------------- P.V.DASAN, S/O.GOPALAN, AGED 50 YEARS, VELANDI VEEDU, NEDUMBRAM, P.O.CHOKLI, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENTS: STATE AND COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SHOBA P., D/O.KANARAN, AGED 38 YEARS, PUNATHIL HOUSE, P.O.OLAVILAM, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ----------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 1705 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of May, 2008 O R D E R This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In a private complaint filed by the complainant, the petitioner and his alleged second wife are the accused. The complainant claims that she is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner herein and during the currency of such legal matrimony the petitioner has contracted a second marriage with the second accused. Complaint was filed before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate examined the complaint and two witnesses and recorded their sworn statement. Thereafter, considering the materials available, summons was issued to the accused under Section 204 Cr.P.C. 2. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the order issuing process to him. What is the grievance? The short contention is that the allegations are false and more detailed enquiry must have been conducted by the learned Magistrate. 3. The statements of the witnesses are placed before me as annexures. I have gone through the same. I am not persuaded to agree that the impugned order suffers from any vice which can justify or warrant invocation of the extraordinary inherent CrlM.C. No. 1705 OF 2008 2 jurisdiction available to this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This petition, in these circumstances, is dismissed. I hasten to observe that the dismissal of this petition will not fetter the rights of the petitioner to raise all contentions in defence before the learned Magistrate. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if unnecessary insistence were made on the personal appearance of the petitioner on all dates of posting, petitioner would necessarily suffer. In my view, no court can or need make such insistence on ritualistic appearance of the accused persons on all dates of trial. The petitioner can make necessary request/application before the learned Magistrate for exemption and appropriate orders must be passed by the learned Magistrate on such application. R. BASANT, JUDGE ttb CrlM.C. No. 1705 OF 2008 3 CrlM.C. No. 1705 OF 2008 4 CrlM.C. No. 1705 OF 2008 5