IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 16TH MAGHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 531 of 2008() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18.01.2008 IN CMP.814/08 IN C.C..1329/1998 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KARUNAGAPPALLY .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------------- PREMJITH, S/O. JAYADHARAN, MEENATHERIL HOUSE, VELLANATHURUTH, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU SMT.K.SUNITHA VINOD SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN (MVA) RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE --------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. JOHNSON, PANTAKASAL PUTHEN VEEDU, KOLLAKA, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI. M.S. BREEZE, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.02.2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== CRL.M.C. No.531 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 5th day of February, 2008. O R D E R The petitioner, who is the accused in C.C.No. 1329 of 1998 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karunagappally which is a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in respect of a cheque involving a sum of Rs.1 lakh, challenges Annexure A3 order dated 18.01.2008 passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karunagappally in C.M.P. No. 814/2008 as per which the petitioner wanted that court to accept an additional witness schedule. Annexure A2 is the additional witness schedule where the first witness is none other than the complainant himself, the 2nd witness is one Krishnan, a social worker, the 3rd witness is the complainant's former counsel who had issued the statutory notice, the 4th witness is the Circle Inspector of Police, Chavara and the 5th witness is none other than the petitioner/accused. While the court below has given valid reasons for not examining the third witness, who was the counsel appearing for the complainant, the court has not given CRL. M.C. NO. 531/2008 : 2: any valid reason as to why witness Nos.2,4 and 5 should not be examined except saying that their examination is not necessary. The court below shall accordingly re-consider the petitioner's request for examining Krishnan, 2nd witness, Circle Inspector of Police, Chavara, the 4th witness and the accused himself who is the last witness. In case the request for examining Krishnan and Circle Inspector of Police, Chavara has been made as a gesture of vexation, the court can give valid reasons for disallowing the request. In case the accused has not been examined as witness and the accused volunteers to examine himself as defence evidence under Section 315 Cr.P.C the court shall not shut out his defence. This Crl. M.C is disposed of as above. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv CRL. M.C. NO. 531/2008 : 3: