IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 676 of 2004(D) ------------------------------------------- (CRA.50/2002 of SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKOE) (CC.821/1997 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V, KOZHIKODE) REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANTS/ACCUSED ----------------------------------------------------------- JAYANANDAN S/O. CHOYI, MUTHUVILEDATH HOUSE, ELATHUR P.O., PERUNTHURUTHI, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE -------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, CHELANOOR. 2. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.K. RAVIKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/06/2008, THE COURT ON 28-2-2008 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Crl.Revision Petition No. 676 of 2004 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Having heard the matter for quite some time this Court passed an order on 2nd day of January 2008, which shall stand appended to this order as Annexure A. Following the aforesaid order, Sri.Umman, the detecting officer, has filed affidavit stating that he was not aware of the summons; that he could not attend earlier because he met with an accident during the last lap of his service and that he was under prolonged treatment even after his retirement. 2. One of the basic contentions of the revision petitioner is that the detecting officer was not examined and therefore, the relevant materials have not been properly linked with the legal evidence already on record. 3. Having perused the files and having heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, I am satisfied that this is not a case which should end merely on the non-availability of the detecting officer for examination. Needless to say, he will have to be examined. Ends of justice ought to be satisfied by affording the petitioner an opportunity and also for the prosecution to have the examination of Sri.Umman, the detecting officer. Crl.R.P. No.676 of 2004 - 2 - For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned orders of conviction and sentence are set aside and the matter is remitted to the court of the JFCM, Kozhikode, directing the petitioner to appear before that court on the 2nd of April, 2008. The bail bond executed by the petitioner on the basis of interim order passed in this case will continue to hold. If the petitioner does not appear before the court, the learned Magistrate will ensure his appearance by immediate process. Transmit the LCRs forthwith. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE While disposing this revision, the date was fixed for the parties to appear before the court of first instance in view of the remand of the case for further trial. The date for appearance so fixed is re-fixed as 30th June 2008. The office will communicate this order and transmit LCRs forthwith. The court below will also expedite further trial in view of the availability of the witness. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, 12th June, 2008. JUDGE skr