IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2008 / 13TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2235 of 2008() ------------------------------ ST.862/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOCHI .................... REVN. PETITIONER: REVISION PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------------------------- HARISH.P.METHA, PROPRIETOR, MAHAVIR INTERFURN, NO.40/6950, NEAR SEA KING HOTEL M.G.ROAD, KOCHI -682 035. BY ADV. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNAMTHANAM (SR.) SRI.THOMAS GEORGE RESPONDENTS: ACCUSED -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. HAJEE.C.UMMERKOYA, CONTRACTOR, PUTHIYAPALAM, CALICUT-673 002. BY ADV. SRI. C.M. NAZER, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== Crl.R.P. No.2235 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 4th day of July, 2008. ORDER The petitioner, who is the complainant in S.T. No. 862 of 2005 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Kochi for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in respect of a cheque for Rs.50,000/-, challenges the order dated 04.03.2008 passed by the Magistrate dismissing the complaint under Section 204(4) Cr.P.C for not taking steps. 2. There might have been some latches on the part of the petitioner in taking steps for the issue of non bailable warrants of arrest against the accused in the case who continues to be absconding. But the petitioner certainly did not deserve a dismissal of his complaint. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and S.T. No. 862 of 2005 shall stand restored to file. The petitioner shall appear before the court below without any further notice on 18.07.2008 by which time he shall have taken all necessary steps for the further progress of the complaint. This Crl.R.P. is disposed of as above. Dated this the 4th day of July, 2008. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv V. RAMKUMAR, J ====================== Crl. M.A. No.6498 of 2008 in Unnumbered Crl. R.P. of 2008 ======================= Date: 04.07.2008 ORDER This is a petition to condone the delay of 16 days in filing the revision. Since the impugned order was passed even before the appearance of the accused, notice to the 2nd respondent/accused is dispensed with. Having regard to the averments in the affidavit in support of this petition, the delay of 16 days in filing the above revision is condoned. Registry to number the revision petition today itself. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv