IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2010 / 28TH JYAISTHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2114 of 2010() ------------------------- ST.99/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, THODUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- SABU SEBASTIAN, AGED 35, KALLEPLACKAL HOUSE, VAZHAKULAM.P.O, VAZHAKULAM, MUVATTUPUZHA NOW RESIDING AT ANGAMALY, C/O. SHIJI SABU, W/O. SABU SEBASTIAN, THEKKEDATHU HOUSE, ANGAMALY.P.O, ANGADIKADAVU. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.ABDUL RASHEED SRI.K.A.SHAMSUDEEN SRI.V.K.MEETHIANKUNJU SMT.SEEMA.E.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT AND STATE ------------------------------------ 1. SREE GOKULAM CHIT AND FINANCE COMPANY (P) LTD. 356, ARCOT ROAD, KODAMBAKKOM, CHENNAI - 600 024, REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, MR.A.V. SANTHOSH, S/O. VIJAYABHANU, ASST. MANAGER (BUSINESS) THODUPUZHA BRANCH. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: dmb V.RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2114 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2010 ORDER Petitioner, who is the accused in S.T.No.99/08 on the file of J.F.C.M Court-II, Thodupuzha, in a prosecution under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, challenges Annexure III order dated 31.5.2010 in CMP No.817/2010, as per which his application under Section 205 Cr.P.C for personal exemption was dismissed mainly for the reason that the Counsel appearing for him does not hold a special Vakkalath. 2. In case the petitioner files a fresh application for personal exemption through his counsel, who is already holding a Vakkalath of the petitioner, the learned Magistrate shall permit him to be represented by his counsel during the trial of the case including examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C and the presence of the petitioner shall not be insisted, unless it is absolutely necessary to do so, either at the time of pronouncing judgment or any time earlier. The fresh petition to be filed hereafter shall be disposed of notwithstanding the order dated 31.5.2010 in CMP No.817/2010 and notwithstanding the pendency of non-bailable warrants against him. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE dmb